Open headphones with large sound stage & strong bass?

[ebhsimon]

I've noticed that closed back headphones tend to have a 'tighter' bass than open headphones according to a lot of reviews and reading. 

I want to get a pair of headphones (with a $300AUD limit) for mostly gaming and music. 

I like open back for gaming due to the larger sound stage, and I'd like a strong bass for music (I am a bit of a bass head, my Logitech G230s have nice bass).

 

I'm upgrading from Logitech G230s, but I cannot wear them for more than an hour or two because they're quite tight and they end up getting pretty uncomfortable. I really feel it on my jaw which I really dislike (weird, I know).

 

I saw a post saying that the Zalman ZM-Mic 1 is quite a bit better than the Logitech G203 included mic, and people say my 203s microphone is good, so the zalman should suffice.

 

I was looking at the Sennheiser HD598s and the Beyerdynamic DT990 Pro Reference (not sure why the Reference is less expensive than the other DT990 Pro XX Ohm editions?), but apart from these I don't really know where to start.

 

But overall the most important aspect of the headphones for meis that they must be comfortable! My Logitech G230s are much too tight... Maybe I'll try sticking a few books between the ear cups to stretch them out a bit...

[ZacDaMan72]

Tighter bass is better... listen to headphones http://www.sonicsense.com/blog/category/headphone-shootouts/ to get a feel of how they'll sound.

[frontliner]

HiFiMAN HE-400

[Paralectic]

beats by dre studio best headphones most swag

[ZacDaMan72]

beats by dre studio best headphones most swag

most swag much bass very beats wow

[creatip123]

I've noticed that closed back headphones tend to have a 'tighter' bass than open headphones according to a lot of reviews and reading. 

I want to get a pair of headphones (with a $300AUD limit) for mostly gaming and music. 

I like open back for gaming due to the larger sound stage, and I'd like a strong bass for music (I am a bit of a bass head, my Logitech G230s have nice bass).

 

 

A bit of long answer:

 

Although there are a lot of different terms for the same things, I think the general consensus about the bass characteristics are: boomy vs punchy, tight vs loose. Boomy usually correlate with loose, and punchy with tight.This is just some technicality

 

Next, the term 'loose' and 'tight' refers to the time it takes for a bass or kick soundwave from the peak to disappear. Put it simple, for example there is a drum kick that goes 'boom'. How do you hear it in your headphone? 'Boom' is tight and punchy, while 'boooommmm' is loose and boomy.

 

Loose and boomy give the illusion of stronger bass, because you hear it a bit longer (in milliseconds) than the tight and punchy ones. 

 

Now this is where you got it a little backward. Imagine this: you're kicking a drum set.

 

- Closed headphones are like you're doing it in a closed room with 4 concrete walls. The kick will echo for a bit, giving the illusion of more bass, but sounds loose.

- Open headphones are like you're doing it in an open area. The kick got little or no echoes to it, giving the illusion of less bass (compared to closed rooms), but sounds tight. 

* this is in general cases

 

So again, which one do you prefer? Tight or big and boomy? With dynamic driver headphones, it's usually one of the two.

 

Planar headphones (like the HE-400 suggested above) however, got quite loud basses, but at the same time, the basses are considered tight. This is because the surface area of the diaphragm of planar drivers are bigger than dynamic ones, and can vibrate more accurately. On the same class/level, planar drivers are more difficult and costly to manufacture, so it affects the price, naturally. 

 

Short answer:

 

Based on your descriptions, I think planars will serve you well. Planars range from ~$100 (T50RP) to over $1000, so just pick your poison....

 

Another characteristic of planars: most planars need an external amp to sound good. There are planars that can be driven to normal volume off of small devices like smartphones, etc (the HE-400 is an example), but to really 'shine', usually they need an external amp.

[ebhsimon]

I prefer tight and punchy over boomy and loose. My motherboard supports up to 600 ohms of impedance, so I'm not going to get an external amp.

[creatip123]

I prefer tight and punchy over boomy and loose. My motherboard supports up to 600 ohms of impedance, so I'm not going to get an external amp.

 

Judging how well a device can drive a headphone (or speakers, or whatever) only by the number of the impedance (how many ohms) is a big misconception, which seems to have taken the consumers by a storm.

 

I'll give 2 examples:

 

1. The Hifiman HE-6 is regarded as one of the hardest to drive headphone in the market. It's far harder to drive the HE-6 properly than say, Beyer's 250ohms headphones, or Sennheiser's 300ohms headphones. So what's the impedance rating of the HE-6? 50 ohms. Just google it to know if it's true or not.

 

2. Lepai 2020A+ is a speaker amp. Its rating is 4 to 8 ohms. So it shouldn't be able to push, say, a 100 ohms headphone, right? Truth is, there's a big chance that headphone will fry when plugged to that amp. Even if it doesn't fry the headphone, the volume knob must be kept at very very low settings (under 25%).

[ebhsimon]

Judging how well a device can drive a headphone (or speakers, or whatever) only by the number of the impedance (how many ohms) is a big misconception, which seems to have taken the consumers by a storm.

 

I'll give 2 examples:

 

1. The Hifiman HE-6 is regarded as one of the hardest to drive headphone in the market. It's far harder to drive the HE-6 properly than say, Beyer's 250ohms headphones, or Sennheiser's 300ohms headphones. So what's the impedance rating of the HE-6? 50 ohms. Just google it to know if it's true or not.

 

2. Lepai 2020A+ is a speaker amp. Its rating is 4 to 8 ohms. So it shouldn't be able to push, say, a 100 ohms headphone, right? Truth is, there's a big chance that headphone will fry when plugged to that amp. Even if it doesn't fry the headphone, the volume knob must be kept at very very low settings (under 25%).

 

You make good points. I guess if it's necessary to get an amp I'll get one. No fuss. 

 

What are the main differences between the Sennheiser HD598 and the Beyerdynamic DT990 Pro 250 ohm? The HD598 is $70 cheaper than the DT990 Pro, but which is better for clarity and positioning in-game?

[creatip123]

You make good points. I guess if it's necessary to get an amp I'll get one. No fuss. 

 

What are the main differences between the Sennheiser HD598 and the Beyerdynamic DT990 Pro 250 ohm? The HD598 is $70 cheaper than the DT990 Pro, but which is better for clarity and positioning in-game?

 

Yes, that's actually the right thing to do. Get the headphone 1st, try it on without any external amp. If it's not loud enough, or sound bad (not enough current can make the headphone distort), then get an adequate amp. 

 

The differences are mostly from the brands (Senns vs Beyers). Brands actually got their own general sound signatures, that are similar between their product lines. The 990 got stronger built, with metals and thick hard plastics, while 598 is mostly plastic. About the sound comparison, that's entirely subjective. Some like the 598, others like 990 more. Never tried the 990, but tried the 598, and didn't like the sound signature (a bit bloated mids). On 1 hand, mids are good for hearing footsteps (not explosions), the other hand, people say 990 got wide soundstage/imaging which is good for 3D positioning....

[xukaiteo]

I don't think you will be able to get a open backed headphone with heavy bass. Maybe I did not search hard enough to find one. But I currently own the HD 598s. It is extremely comfortable. The headphones sound great for my use (Music, gaming). This pair of headphones is a little light on bass. But the soundstage is very wide and I can pin point the location of my enemies in FPS games. I haven't tried the beyerdynamics 990 before so I cannot compare it between the 598s. Even if I could, its down to your personal opinion so you have to test both headphones yourself.

[creatip123]

I don't think you will be able to get a open backed headphone with heavy bass. Maybe I did not search hard enough to find one. But I currently own the HD 598s. It is extremely comfortable. The headphones sound great for my use (Music, gaming). This pair of headphones is a little light on bass. But the soundstage is very wide and I can pin point the location of my enemies in FPS games. I haven't tried the beyerdynamics 990 before so I cannot compare it between the 598s. Even if I could, its down to your personal opinion so you have to test both headphones yourself.

 

Try planars, like HE-400 and the likes. The bass is not heavy, but it's extra delicious. Like good sub vs cheap sub, compared to heavy, boomy basses of cheap closed back headphones. 

[xukaiteo]

Try planars, like HE-400 and the likes. The bass is not heavy, but it's extra delicious. Like good sub vs cheap sub, compared to heavy, boomy basses of cheap closed back headphones.

Hmm...... Maybe I should try planars one day. Do they require a powerful amp?? Is my Objective 2 headphone amplifier sufficient??

[penance]

If you want more bass go with the DT990's, both the DT990's and the 598's are great headphones. Having moved myself from the 598's to the DT990's I much preferred the DT990 sound signature. Now as anyone would tell you this is purely subjective but based on your stated requirements I think you would be happy with the DT990's. Comfort wise they are both great although the 598's for me were a little on the snug side, but I have a big melon.

[NannerBeans]

Hmm...... Maybe I should try planars one day. Do they require a powerful amp?? Is my Objective 2 headphone amplifier sufficient??

Your o2 should be fine for pretty much any headphones. I personally think Mayflower modded T50RP are the best but those are semi open and a bit closer to closed than fully open. I'm not too much of a fan of the Hifimans but those are good options if you want a fully open planer headphone. The Phillips Fidelio X1 is a fairly bassy open headphone but I think those are more boomy than tight. 

[Hotys]

You can check these, but im not sure if its exactly what you looking for http://www.roccat.org/Products/Gaming-Sound/ROCCAT-Kave-XTD-5-1-Digital/, they sound great and have strong bass. There are few disadvantages, like you cant plug the in front panel/speakers and if you use setreo/7.1 speakers you will have to switch audio profile every time you want to use them to 5.1...

[ShearMe]

This is because the surface area of the diaphragm of planar drivers are bigger than dynamic ones, and can vibrate more accurately.

 

 

 

Another characteristic of planars: most planars need an external amp to sound good.

 

 

to really 'shine', usually they need an external amp.

 

[creatip123]

 

 

 

This is because the surface area of the diaphragm of planar drivers are bigger than dynamic ones, and can vibrate more accurately.

 

Red box: That's roughly the same surface area as a 2cm x 20cm rectangle. Compared to the largest dynamic driver in headphones in the market, 60mm diameter = 30mm radius = 28.3 sq cm. Even when rounded down, 28 sq cm vs 39 sq cm, that's an 11 sq cm difference = 2cm x 5,5cm rectangle of difference.

 

 

Another characteristic of planars: most planars need an external amp to sound good.

 

to really 'shine', usually they need an external amp.

 

Blue box: I'm going out on a limb by saying there are not many built-in/internal amps of soundcards, onboards, DAPs, smartphones, etc that could output 1-4W (1000mW-4000mW) of electricity @70ohms. For comparison, E10k's output is 200mW @32ohms

[ShearMe]

 

Red box: That's roughly the same surface area as a 2cm x 20cm rectangle. Compared to the largest dynamic driver in headphones in the market, 60mm diameter = 30mm radius = 28.3 sq cm. Even when rounded down, 28 sq cm vs 39 sq cm, that's an 11 sq cm difference = 2cm x 5,5cm rectangle of difference.

 

 

Blue box: I'm going out on a limb by saying there are not many built-in/internal amps of soundcards, onboards, DAPs, smartphones, etc that could output 1-4W (1000mW-4000mW) of electricity @70ohms. For comparison, E10k's output is 200mW @32ohms

 

Red box: this is still assuming that more area means it vibrates more accurately.

 

Blue box: what is "optimal power" based off? Just because some website says it doesn't make it true.

[creatip123]

Red box: this is still assuming that more area means it vibrates more accurately.

 

Blue box: what is "optimal power" based off? Just because some website says it doesn't make it true.

 

Red box:

 

 

From Audeze's website: 

 

Planar magnetic transducers offer numerous benefits:

 

Responsiveness:  Since the force created by the magnetic field is distributed across most of the diaphragm surface, the planar magnetic diaphragm moves faster and with far greater accuracy to the input signal.

 

Frequency and Distortion:  The magnetic force that drives the lightweight diaphragm delivers rapid acceleration thus achieving a wide frequency response, low distortion and excellent sound quality.

 

But yeah, perhaps we shouldn't put much credibility on claims by a planar headphone factory.

 

 

From Innerfidelity:

 

Low Distortion --- Unlike dynamic drivers that are driven from the point at which the voice coil is attached (usually near the center), planar magnetic drivers are forced to move over their entire surface. This means they don’t suffer from modal break-up found on traditional drivers when the cone surface starts wobbling in undesirable ways at higher frequencies.

 

Large and Powerful Diaphragm --- Getting powerful, tight bass response is difficult for most dynamic headphones as the driver surface area is relatively small and would have to make large excursions to move the volume of air that good bass response requires. The force used in electrostatic drivers (the static force the makes your socks cling together out of the drier) is relatively weak compared to the electro-magnetic force in planar magnetic drivers. Electrostatic drivers have trouble delivering the horsepower needed for big bass notes. The large surface area of the planar magnetic driver coupled with the powerful drive of the electromagnetic force permits large amounts of air to be moved with authority. My experience with planar magnetic cans is that they offer the best bass response of any type of headphone.

 

Responsiveness --- The diaphragm in an Orthodynamic headphone is very light, and the electromagnetic force is very strong, so the ability for the signal to accelerate the diaphragm is very, very good. Like electrostatic speakers, planar magnetic headphones tend to sound very coherent and spacious.

 

But, some people think Tyll from Innerfidelity is a bit too 'crazy' about headphones (I don't, though)

 

 

From Wisdom audio (speakers):

 

Planar magnetic drivers

There are numerous advantages to the use of Planar Magnetic Drivers (PMDs):

 

Highly detailed

Planar magnetic drivers are like electrostatic speakers (ESLs) in that the moving mass of the diaphragm is extremely small, lighter even than the air it moves. It can therefore be driven with both delicacy and accuracy, without the blurring effects of excessive inertia.

 

More reliable

Planar magnetics have a huge advantage over traditional dynamic drivers, in that the “voice coil” is spread out over a large area rather than squeezed into a narrow gap within a massive chunk of metal. As a result, planar magnetic drivers can dissipate heat effectively that would otherwise build up in a traditional voice coil. Planar magnetic speakers can handle a lot of power without undue stress or audible strain. In fact, for a given surface area, they can handle many times the power of a traditional dynamic driver.

 

Blue box: Yeap, there are 2 possibilities, either they're lying or they're telling the truth, right?

 

Assume they're lying by saying the optimal power needed is 1-4W. Why go as high as 1-4W? I mean, if I'm lying to sell more of my product, I'd state a more efficient number (than the true number) to attract more buyers, wouldn't I? Say, I'm selling a car that goes 10 mpg, and I want to lie about the fuel consumption. Should I go with 16 mpg, or 5 mpg? Same as the audeze data in blue box. If the true number is say, 500mW, why lie and make it 1-4W? People will think twice of buying (aside from the price, of course) because they might not have the 1-4W amp to drive it optimally. If the true number is say, 10W, then it would make sense for them to lie and state it as 1-4W, but if this is the case, then it would just further justify the need of an external amp to drive it optimally. 

[BoredErica]

I believe that generally you want a larger, thinner material for the planars. It helps, but it's only one aspect to building a headphone. From a headphone recommending perspective we have to keep in mind that we can't judge quality based on size. That's like comparing CPU frequency across different CPUs from different companies to try to figure out which is better. It doesn't guarantee that a given headphone is better at a given price point simply because it's a planar.

 

I've already calculated the required amount of power to drive the LCD2 in the Audiofeelz Thread a week ago. "1-4w" of power? That's sort of a large margin of error, don't you think?

[creatip123]

I believe that generally you want a larger, thinner material for the planars. It helps, but it's only one aspect to building a headphone. From a headphone recommending perspective we have to keep in mind that we can't judge quality based on size. That's like comparing CPU frequency across different CPUs from different companies to try to figure out which is better. It doesn't guarantee that a given headphone is better at a given price point simply because it's a planar.

 

I've already calculated the required amount of power to drive the LCD2 in the Audiofeelz Thread a week ago. "1-4w" of power? That's sort of a large margin of error, don't you think?

 

Ummm yeah, not saying planars is definitely better, because it's planars, and certainly not because of its size. I said the bass is tighter, because 'This is because the surface area of the diaphragm of planar drivers are bigger than dynamic ones, and can vibrate more accurately' The underlined word is 'and' (2 separate things), not 'thus', or 'therefore' The diaphragm can vibrate more accurately because it's very thin and virtually weightless (compared to dynamic's diaphragm). I actually got the diaphragm on my work desk, from the broken driver of my HE-400. 

 

As to why the bass feels better and tighter, I refer to Tyll's words

 

 

Large and Powerful Diaphragm --- Getting powerful, tight bass response is difficult for most dynamic headphones as the driver surface area is relatively small and would have to make large excursions to move the volume of air that good bass response requires. The force used in electrostatic drivers (the static force the makes your socks cling together out of the drier) is relatively weak compared to the electro-magnetic force in planar magnetic drivers. Electrostatic drivers have trouble delivering the horsepower needed for big bass notes. The large surface area of the planar magnetic driver coupled with the powerful drive of the electromagnetic force permits large amounts of air to be moved with authority. My experience with planar magnetic cans is that they offer the best bass response of any type of headphone.

 

But yeah, that's just 1 aspect. Tighter bass doesn't automatically make it a better headphone.

 

As the number goes, I'm guessing it's supposed to be a range. 1W-4W optimal, meaning under 1W or over 4W, it wouldn't be considered optimal (still gives sound of course, but not optimal).

 

Same like the other thread about speakers, the Bose ML3

 

http://cdn03.trixum.de/upload2/70400/70315/1/1b44efd68768a682b30ec4354678b7a9f.jpg

 

*gave a link instead of showing the picture as to not derail too much from original topic

 

From the picture: recommended amp: 15-60W. 45W difference is one helluva range...

[ShearMe]

 

Red box:

 

 

But yeah, perhaps we shouldn't put much credibility on claims by a planar headphone factory.

 

...exactly...

 

 

Red box:

 

But, some people think Tyll from Innerfidelity is a bit too 'crazy' about headphones (I don't, though)

 

Pseudoscience will definitely make you sound crazy.

 

Red box:

 

le wisdom audio

 

I don't disagree with anything this says, but it doesn't add to your argument either, so...

 

 

 

Assume they're lying by saying the optimal power needed is 1-4W. Why go as high as 1-4W? I mean, if I'm lying to sell more of my product, I'd state a more efficient number (than the true number) to attract more buyers, wouldn't I? Say, I'm selling a car that goes 10 mpg, and I want to lie about the fuel consumption. Should I go with 16 mpg, or 5 mpg? Same as the audeze data in blue box. If the true number is say, 500mW, why lie and make it 1-4W? People will think twice of buying (aside from the price, of course) because they might not have the 1-4W amp to drive it optimally. If the true number is say, 10W, then it would make sense for them to lie and state it as 1-4W, but if this is the case, then it would just further justify the need of an external amp to drive it optimally. 

 

You're forgetting that audiopeelz want a difficult-to-drive headphone so they can justify their expensive amplifiers.

 

The underlined word is 'and' (2 separate things), not 'thus', or 'therefore' 

 

Again, tldr, and gg language differences.

[BoredErica]

From experience, planars do tend to have lower sensitivity, requiring more power. In this case saying that you probably need an amp to get the most out of a planar headphone is actually not THAT far of a stretch. It's a popular audiophile BS phrase, so it easily sets off people's triggers outside of Headfi. However, they vary wildly in their requirements. No matter the headphone, planar or dynamic, we need to look at the sensitivity & efficiency either way in a case by case basis. Shearme has a point, some people take pride in being able to drive a hard to drive headphone, for some it's a subconscious desire, like a dick measuring challenge. We can't take what a company says as fact every time, especially with the parts we can measure or calculate ourselves. You're trying to apply normal logic into the audiophile world, acting like humans act rationally every time. That's not the case. The LCDX is comically easy to drive, but does that stop audiophiles from wanting to spend more on amps to drive it somehow? Nope. Many audiophiles actively want their headphone to require better amps to get the best sound. Even when Audeze flat out says "Look, this one is designed to be easy to drive..." the audiophiles are like, "Nope! You need the best amp!"...

 

I do think planars (from my experience) tend to have better bass than the average dynamic headphone of that price range. I do think there could be something there, about the physical differences of planar magnetics vs dynamic headphones having different characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses. I don't necessarily think it's "pseudoscience". I think it's engineering. However, it's hard to totally prove that our ideas are correct. The amp and dac world is pretty easy to figure out as long as you're striving for accuracy aka fidelity. The headphone world? Not as much. We have to be careful about the general rules we make about how planars perform because it's very subjected to bias, placebo, etc, since we are being told ahead of time what to expect especially. It's shades of grey, I don't think we can call it pseudoscience but we also have to be careful of calling it an outright fact. But you know what are facts? Electrical engineering and Ohm's law and all that Schiit.

 

I don't care for Audeze's "recommended power". I know it's wrong just by looking at it because the number is off by an order of magnitude (well, if we look at the 4w part anyways). Inner Fidelity's measurements for the impedance and efficiency of the LCD2 are in the same ballpark to Audeze's, so that checks out. I know I can trust the impedance and efficiency (Audeze listed their efficiency as sensitivity) figures, and from that it's simple math to calculate required power and voltage. The fun part is, the tools to disprove the 1-4w rating are a few lines away from the power requirement rating. But I bet the large majority of audiophiles have no idea what to do with the numbers. 1-4w is a perfect number to sell expensive amps and to get all audiophile-ly up in there. "Look! An O2 isn't enuf' cuz 4w!" Bullshit. InnerFidelity's own measurements lay Audeze's claim of "1-4w" to the grave. Sennheiser takes a different approach: Instead of just listing a 'recommended power', they just recommend their own headphone amp that costs $1k, lol. After all, nobody knows how to power Sennheiser HD800, a picky headphone, like Sennheiser!

 

BTW: 
Here is me picking apart the data and calculating required voltage and power from Audeze's specs and Inner Fidelity's (close, but not exactly the same) measurements:

http://www.hydrogenaud.io/forums/index.php?showtopic=106919&st=25&gopid=875607entry875607

[creatip123]

snip

 

I think I got a bit of an idea of why there's a mismatch in the numbers from Audeze website.

 

 

The 1-4W optimal power mismatch (doesn't compute) with the 93dB/mW. To be objective, there are 2 possibilities:

 

1. They pull a random number of 1-4W out of thin air, or using dice, or whatever. Realistically speaking, this could work with smaller companies, but not with bigger companies. It's not the consumer they should watch out for (to call on their bluff), but it's the competing companies that are dying to find dirt of their competitors. 

 

2. Miscommunications. It's either the 1-4W number is right, or the 93dB/mW is right. And somewhere along the line, there was a miscom on the measurement unit. So it's the miscom on either the guy writing/calculating the 1-4W, or the guy writing/calculating the 93dB/mW.

 

 

If, let's just say for the sake of argument, the 1-4W is right, then the 93dB/mW should be wrong, but how?

 

With a headphone power calculator (http://www.apexhifi.com/downloads/hp_power.xls), if the 93dB/mW was in truth 93dB/Vrms, then:

 

 

(lower box) to get to 112dB, it needs 1135mW = 1,135W

 

 

By applying ~4W, it goes to 117.5dB.

 

So assuming it's 93dB/Vrms, 1-4W accounted for 112dB - 117.5dB SPL (and perhaps they gave a little headroom on the power rating to account for some inefficiencies). Makes a bit more sense, although sounds above 110dB shouldn't be recommended ever.

 

If it's in fact 93dB/mW, then the guy calculating the optimal power read it wrong (by reading it as /Vrms), and the actual optimal power would be far less than stated.

 

If it's in fact the optimal power is actually 1-4W, then the guy writing the 93dB/mW was wrong, and it should have been stated as 93dB/Vrms.

 

I'm just covering the possibilities. The one who really knows the fact is them, of course. I've actually mailed them, asking about this (how they came up with 1-4W). Let's just hope they write back. 

 

There is a 3rd possibility on my mind, that is 'plausible deniability', but that's a bit of a long shot.

 

I'm good with whichever the fact is.