CHANGSTAR: Audiophile Headphone Reviews and Early 90s Style BBS
Lobby => Headphone Measurements => Topic started by: DoggEared on January 08, 2014, 09:01:32 AM
-
Hello, is this internet on?
I'm a recovering audiophile. Been aurally sober for over 15 years. As a musician it is pretty important keep music at a higher priority than the gear. That's pretty tough for a self-recordist tho. There's a whole signal chain with all kinds of twisted links that want to destroy the perfect sound I've already recorded in my head.
This year, sadly, I've decided to try some new phones. My trusted and loved 240DFs need some modern, high quality company. How hard can that be?
I've been auditioning a number of new cans, primarily for tracking/monitoring/reference use. Spent far too much time on Gearslutz/Head-Fi/Inner Fidelity and now here. As incomplete as headphone measurements can be, subjective only headphone evaluation and correlation is even murkier - filled with tidal pools of self-delusion and tribal brand bias. I'm hoping this little pirate haven may help me keep my balance as I walk the audition plank.
I've enjoyed the measurement AND experience vibe of this board, but what sparked me to join this ragtag band of arrrgonauts was this post on the SRH-840: http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,67.0.html (http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,67.0.html)
Yup. Plots have a very strong correlation with qualities of sound. The correlation is "pretty good" but not 100%. The 840 is a shining (one of the few) example of such an exception. I hear a lot of false detail with these cans, although it is very clean sounding (as the CSD would suggest). The 840 design definitely eliminates a lot of residual junk after the impulse response. But it also eliminates a lot of musical information too.
Indeed. Since it measured great, the 840 was on my top 10 list of closed cans (I need closed 'cause finding the sweet mic position on open phones isn't). On initial listen the 840 was pretty dang good. Then I performed a more in-depth comparison between it and the HD 380. Now, the 380 has some big fat low down issues and the irritating closed can quack, however, it does one very important thing much better than the 840.
I wish I knew how to express this better, never mind how to measure it, but here's my explanation of why the 840 is, to me, unusably flawed. I auditioned a recording I made years ago and have heard on dozens of systems and phones. Me and the 240DF know this piece really well. So, I'm listening to it on the 840 and enjoying the faux-detail and then switch over to the 380 and after the initial rush of comb-filter fever (to me all headphones are just a collection of filters, some better optimized than others), anyhow, where was I? On the 380, the nylon guitar solo had the correct sense of space and placement, like it was one instrument. Which it is, so that's something.
So, back to the 840 and it hit me. The guitar wasn't a single instrument anymore. It was like the aural equivalent of a CGI cartoon warp. Suddenly the single guitar was warped into two or three unnatural layers. The attack was dis-embodied from the body. The body dis-embodied from the room. It was creepy. Unnatural, yet very detailed, which made it even creepier. And yet it was subtle. Most listening might just say, oh, that's a nylon guitar. But, on the 840 it was a nylon guitar that was picked 2 feet closer to the mic than where the strings were struck. Creepy.
What to call that? Harmonic coherence? Dynamic spacial integrity? Perceptually challenged? How to divine that bit of info from static measurements? That's my issue with 'snapshot' measurements. It's a snapshot. Static FR curves can be useful for getting a gross tonal correlation and CSD plots reveal some tantalizing clues. If only they were animated in 3D. If only our eyes could absorb as much information as our ears. If only synaesthesia could be used in headphone analysis. If only I'd stop rambling.
Sorry to blather in a first post. Hopefully I won't bother you maties too much more. Just have a point to make later on how wrong the basis of standard FR plots are. It's a psycho-acoustic/music thing that no plot appears to account for. But, will wait until my 2nd or 3rd post to be flogged by the better pirate minds that sail these waters.
BTW, here's my shortlist for closed studio cans:
HD 380 (does some things terribly wrong, but a few things extraordinarily right)
Q40 (Cheap and open to all kinds of modding and needs it)
ATH-50 (good dynamics, a little woofy and closed sounding, but worse, uncomfortable. )
Focal Spirit Pro (Haven't heard them yet)
Sony 7520 (Haven't heard them yet either)
B&W P7 (Again, have only heard them on the internet, so they must be good.)
Thanks for reading, responding or scolding!
-
Keep the K240 DF, it is one AKGs best dynamics when the sound signature suits you. Think early, middle and late production in some cases.
There are so many closed headphones that it is better to try a few. As for suggestions, read a bit and you know what we like and why. Purrins measurements are very informative.
-
Headphones for your particular use are completely out of my wheelhouse, but I can't help but ask myself why not LFF's Paradox? They seem like great candidates for monitoring, and they are closed. They're not the cheapest thing out there, but they seem to tick all the boxes.
Your post also makes me wonder why more professionals don't mention using the UERM for this kind of work?
-
Second the P-dox. The treble is not spectacular, I'm just not sure that there's anything that can be done there with the T50RP driver. The rest of it though would be superb for monitoring. They are one of the closest headphones I've ever heard to real studio monitors (Events, Genelecs, etc) rather than the typical garbage "monitor" headphones that have "you've gotta be kidding" FR.
Aside from those, I would definitely consider the Beyer DT250-250 and NAD HP50. Muppet has had very nice things to say about the new Focal, though supposedly build quality is still pretty iffy on those. You might also want to try the AKG K267 Tiesto. "DJ" headphones are usually horrible, but supposedly those are actually a lot better than the sub average K550.
-
I think the Mad Dog 3.2 is pretty good if you want something a bit more laid-back and/or cheaper than the Paradox. But the Paradox is better overall. This is assuming you have a good source behind them. The T50RP can be surprisingly hard to drive. You could also mod your own T50RP to your tastes, which I'd actually recommend first if you're into that.
I know the MD isn't classified as a studio headphone, but it doesn't seem too out of line based on your current list of possibilities.
-
Wait a second. The K240DF is a semi-open headphone so don't rule out other semis like the DT880. Also keep in mind that the DF stands for diffuse field, so you'll want phones along that vein such as the SRH-940 (which is very different from the 840) or the DT880. If you can't find a good closed-ish set of cans and make the jump to open designs then the K601 is the first one to try. It's like the K240DF turned up to 11, BUT it's an open design in every sense. I never use open cans in the studio.
-
Wait a second. The K240DF is a semi-open headphone so don't rule out other semis like the DT880. Also keep in mind that the DF stands for diffuse field, so you'll want phones along that vein such as the SRH-940 (which is very different from the 840) or the DT880. If you can't find a good closed-ish set of cans and make the jump to open designs then the K601 is the first one to try. It's like the K240DF turned up to 11, BUT it's an open design in every sense. I never use open cans in the studio.
Honestly I hated the K601. As a monitoring can - no. It has slightly more bass than the K701, but still basically no bass. Totally unbalanced response, and very aggressive upper-mid treble region. Really mediocre detail as well. They did an ok job with acoustic guitar, but otherwise royally sucked with just about every other type of music I tried. The DT880 is far from my favorite, but it destroys the K601, that's for sure.
-
ahoy
Welcome to the forum!
It would probably help if you gave a price range. If I was looking for a studio monitor sound in a closed headphone the Paradox by LFF would be my first choice. After hearing some snippets of his remasters I am confident he knows how to make a studio monitor.
If you are looking for something cheaper I would go for the Fostex T50rp. I am not particularly handy, but they are really easy to modify. Just open up the enclosures, add some damping material, and fine tune it from there. I was really happy with the way mine turned out, and for $99 you can't go wrong.
-
Hello there, DoggEared.
Asking for recommendations is best kept to our forum's advice thread, and personal introductions should be kept for the introductions thread. I decided to keep this separate rather than merging it however because you bring up an interesting phenomena.
Broadly speaking, I call it 'cohesiveness' when the different components of an audio track come together and sound like a unified whole. A place for everything, and everything in its place. For me it's a fine balance, because going too far in the other direction can result in a muddy or overly flattened sound, with everything running together and not properly delineated. I like there to be good separation, as it makes it possible to have the proper sense of timing that is so integral to most forms of music. Sometimes, for whatever reason, the pieces don't always add up to the right whole however. I've experienced this in different ways. The imaging can be quite pin-point, but the sense of disconnect between instruments and even notes is too great. Those components never come together into a forest and remain a collection of individual trees.
As for recommendations, the Fostex T50RP drivers have a lot of potential and can sound as good as significantly more expensive headphones if properly modded. If you don't want to attempt it yourself, I believe LFF's Paradox Classic and Paradox Slant models are the best mods you can buy these days. The Alpha Dogs from Mr. Speakers are another popular option, though I've never heard them personally.
The Focal Spirit Professional is a fantastic little headphone in my opinion. It has a rather neutral signature and is fairly comfortable. Build quality could be a little sturdier perhaps, but I don't have any issues with mine so far.
The K550 / K551 from AKG has a fabulous design and is quite comfortable, and supposedly it sounds very nice if you get one of the 'good' ones. I wasn't fortunate enough to get one of the 'good' ones though, and I felt it sounded quite terrible at the time. That's product variation for you! Still, it's worth looking into if you want a more analytic type of signature. On the other hand there's the Sony 1R and Philips Fidelio L1 if you want a less analytic and warmer sound. All of these models (K550, 1R, L1) are extremely well built and comfortable in my opinion.
Other closed stuff worth looking into:
NAD Viso HP50
B&W P7
KEF M500
Sennheiser Momentum
Sennheiser HD25 Aluminum / Amperior / HD26 Pro
Closed headphones are actually something of an obsession of mine these days, and I've made it a personal mission of sorts to investigate as many of the current offerings as I can. Perhaps I'll make a big thread about it in the coming months.
If you aren't adverse to in-ear monitors, there's a whole host of options for under $300 that sound quite good as well.
-
Arrr...thanks everyone for the suggestions. And sorry for a cross pollinated first post. My initial intention was to express the 'cohesiveness' experience or lack of it with the 840 and how to measure it so it never happens again. ;-) Then my selfish need for aural grail took over and so it goes.
How can we measure cohesiveness? The 840 have lots of separation between elements in a mix, but it's what it does to the individual elements that's disturbing. Very puzzling. Maybe it's as simple as the 5Khz ring-a-dingie as seen in purrin's CSD. Since it's so clean elsewhere, this one anomaly is left exposed and it screws up the apparent coherence. Or not.
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=67.0;attach=1778;image)
The 240DF are not going anywhere. They're my 'reference' reference phones. But, they're less than ideal for mic position setup. Semi-closed, not enough isolation (or bass) to be confident. Might consider modding my RP50, most of the pinna scarring from my last use of the RP has healed. Need to find a mod that reduces the weight by 100 grams. Removing those pesky magnets might be the first step. In-ears, use 'em for live use occasionally, but not practical in the phone off/phone on studio situation at all. Oops, I've done it again. ;-)
I tried a pair of 550s. Must have been a bad pair. Horrible highs. Off the list. Also heard a pair of 601s, but never got on with them, something in the balance between low mid and uppers mids just felt wrong. Headphones are the most personal listening environment, it's almost like everyone's ears and perceptions are uniquely individual. Maybe we just need to a method to measure our individual perceptions objectively. How hard can that be?
-
As a long term 240DF user, i finally went from those to Senn HD590 for awhile, and then to Mad Dog 3.2 and lately to Alpha Dog.
The Alpha Dog is particularly suited for monitoring use and as they are tuned to be as neutral as possible. The aforementioned Paradox (which I have not heard) are said to be similar and similarly tuned.
Recently, I surfed by chance to two unrelated Youtube videos of recording sessions and in both cases, they used stock T40RPs (closed version of the T50RP) for the musicians to use while recording.
-
Some might find the Alpha Dog to be a bit too hot and uneven in the upper mids/treble, though most are very happy with the headphone. I happened to fall in the camp of not being too impressed with the AD. Maybe with some revisions down the road...
Personally, I think the Paradox is a better option for the money. (But still not the value of DIY)
-
Ok, I'll play in the DIY pool. Probably drown, but it's for science.
Pulled my T50s out of the closet. They got a ton of studio use 10 years ago. Put them on with and without earpads. Not much difference. So there's that. New pads are mandatory. Cruised the 700+ pages of the BMF epic thread. Will attempt my variant on the DBV #3 with the materials at hand. If I like the sound, comfort and can get my head around, uh, under, the weight, then I may either tweak some more or consider the pro modded versions. Or not. I like to tweak. Prefer to tweak songs than damping material, but it's for science.
Will need to build a crude measuring rig too. How hard can that be? Not fond of building BMF's human dummy head system tho. That's gotta hurt!
Thanks for the assistance, encouragement or insanity. ;-)
-
You can get the Alpha Pads by themselves from MrSpeakers and they are a significant improvement for any T50RP. Just be sure to re-tune after installing them.
-
I think I know the problem. We're all assuming different things. facepalm Some recommendations are coming from experience in the studio, some are coming from experience in music listening. I made some recommendations based on my assumptions and they got rightfully torn apart by others. I listen to music on different gear than I mix on. I'll get to that in a bit.
You have a track you're using for auditioning gear. What does it sound like on some wicked flat studio monitors (Dynaudio or such), or in the car? Do you have coherency issues if you play only the left audio track? What does it sound like on stuff that's not headphones? Are you pleased with how it sounds not on the K240DF?
The more time I spend in the studio the more I stop nagging about every crazy detail in an instrument because I want it ALL to sound right, not to sound like you can hear three microtones and two overtones coming from the same instrument. Just like applying the principle of using a dynamic mic because it sucks some life out of the instrument but lets it cut through the mix to sound right in the end. Therefore I use two low-end systems and I seem to be getting it "right" way more than I used to. I just use the K171 Mk II and a Cambridge Soundworks radio with the loudness off and the bass dialed back 1 notch. That's it. Everything I produce on those sounds good on everything it gets played on from iBuds to the car to mega systems. It's so massively counterintuitive to some but it's the best in terms of end results of material. I don't use my IEMs or any of my other cans. I could tweak the music enough to enjoy what I make with those but nobody else would like it.
So, don't get a hyper-resolving headphone because to get that AND coherency will cost you preciously either by dollars or tinkering or both. :)p4
-
Thanks, Mr. Funk!
Translation is so easily lost in translation. I've gotten pretty good with the 240DF - I know it so well and its weaknesses, so I can have a mix translate with minimal tweaking on monitor speakers later (Adam/Tannoy).
The issue with the 240DF is further up the sound food chain. At the source. It's highly unreliable for determining mic placement and live monitoring. Mainly because of bleed and lack of weight in the bass. Spend too much time guessing, 2nd guessing and pretending. That's why I want to get a high quality set of closed cans. Something that is high resolution, dynamically honest and neutral enough that I learn to rely on them to reveal the optimum mic(s) and placement. Within reason. I'm not trying to make audiophile recordings, even if some audiophiles really like some of my work. I just want a good clean closed pair of cans that make recording, especially on location, easier and less speculative. Is that asking so much?
IME, getting the source nailed makes the rest of the mixing process more about mixing instead of fixing. Now if it happened that I could use the same pair of phones for the whole process and have it translate pretty well to the rest of the world, well, I'd really like that too.
I use some lo-fi combos to spot check the translation, Teac iDevice radio, my TB FR (homemade horrortones) and final car stereo check. However, I also want to hear the translation on high resolution devices too. Including headphones. I basically want it all for less than $300. Is that asking so much? ;-)
-
How can we measure cohesiveness? The 840 have lots of separation between elements in a mix, but it's what it does to the individual elements that's disturbing. Very puzzling. Maybe it's as simple as the 5Khz ring-a-dingie as seen in purrin's CSD.
Haha. It's interesting you measure that. I recall having an in person discussing the 840 with LFF and Anax: "Plasticky timbre", "A beautiful woman who is bad in bed", etc.
- I wonder about harmonic distortion - I didn't take that measurement back in those days.
- The slightly rising response from the upper bass toward the treble may be a huge contributor to this lack of coherence.
- You can look at this other way: a shallow dip between 200Hz and 2k. That's never good. Talk about the fundamental note region being sucked out...
One of these days I'm going to do a good write up on T50RP modded - without revealing any trade secrets.
-
I can't get mic placement with open or semi-open phones. Also, big soundstage headphones can deceive.
-
One of these days I'm going to do a good write up on T50RP modded - without revealing any trade secrets.
Oh...my, that would be excellent. Especially if you leave out the fiddly bits. After a few hundred pages into the epic BMF thread at HF, am now wondering if I ever want to view the internet again. ;-) Damping a small pressure chamber should not require a degree in fluid dynamics and a certificate from the Micro Assembly Department, but it would seem to help.
-
i have both the 240DF and closed K271mkii. i think they're pretty close tonally and details-wise, with the K271 sounding more akin to a closed version of the 240DF. you can also roll different pads to achieve different soundstaging and freq response.