Which headphones would you buy for 1000$

[ShearMe]

I could not settle for one set of headphones no matter how good they are, I need different characteristics for different situations.

 

My HD 650's will be the last thing in my possession I ever let go, but allowing for some minor amount of luxury in life I agree.

[Whit3Rav3n]

what? your reasoning is all backward,  headphones remove room acoustics, that's all, they are not designed to cater for auditory processing even though by their nature they have a different effect on it.

 

http://www.musicradar.com/news/tech/monitors-vs-headphones-which-is-best-for-mixing-574584/

 

 

 

I rotate through them depending on the music I am listening to  and the mood I am in (I may only use one set once a month or even twice a year),  I could not settle for one set of headphones no matter how good they are, I need different characteristics for different situations.

It is too late here to go into detail, here is an article about how harman determines the headphone target response. So no a headphone doesn´t just remove the room acoustics, the transfer function of the ears is completely different for listening to sounds coming from further away than listening to headphones directly at your ears.

 

More information

 

You can also check beyerdynamics faq, they also describe this effekt for the question why headphone manufacturers never post frequency response graphs.

[mr moose]

It is too late here to go into detail, here is an article about how harman determines the headphone target response. So no a headphone doesn´t just remove the room acoustics, the transfer function of the ears is completely different for listening to sounds coming from further away than listening to headphones directly at your ears.

 

More information

 

You can also check beyerdynamics faq, they also describe this effekt for the question why headphone manufacturers never post frequency response graphs.

 

I'm guessing you didn't read that article too thoroughly.  They are searching for the most pleasing response curve from a headphone not a way to overcome auditory processing. 

 

I am very familiar with Dr, Tooles  work, he was instrumental in researching the importance of resonance control in loudspeaker systems some 30 years ago.  A previously overlooked aspect in favor of FR.

 

 

People prefer headphones that mimic the sound of good speakers in a good room.

 

 

Surprise surprise, people like the sound of speakers in a room(flat response if you read the article),  much like the monitors that engineers use to master music on.  So is it any real surprise that headphone engineers are trying to get their headphones to sound like that? 

[Whit3Rav3n]

I'm guessing you didn't read that article too thoroughly.  They are searching for the most pleasing response curve from a headphone not a way to overcome auditory processing. 

 

I am very familiar with Dr, Tooles  work, he was instrumental in researching the importance of resonance control in loudspeaker systems some 30 years ago.  A previously overlooked aspect in favor of FR.

 

 

Surprise surprise, people like the sound of speakers in a room(flat response if you read the article),  much like the monitors that engineers use to master music on.  So is it any real surprise that headphone engineers are trying to get their headphones to sound like that? 

If you read the article are we even disagreeing? My statement was that a flat frequency response in a headphone is not desirable because it will not give the same sound impression as listening to flat speakers. That is also pretty much the first thing written in the article. And if you look at the raw frequency response of neutral headphones they are very similar to the Head Related Transfer Function. The reason why the have to do subjective testing is also stated, because you can not simply determine the closest to flat speaker sounding Head Related Transfer Function just by measurement. 

 

Second Part for people who are interested in more Here they are not just trying to achieve the most neutral sound but try to find the most preferred headphone frequency response. Still the preferred response turned out to be very close to the measured Head Related Transfer Function. 

 

Also please note how headphone reviewers always use the compensated frequency response to evaluate sounding of a headphone and never the raw frequency response. The compensated response is the raw response divided by the Head Related Transfer Function.

[Valhallatier]

If i can, i will probably buy the senn's HD 800 or Beyer's T1, but considering the price range, the LCD-2 is perfect

My HD 650's will be the last thing in my possession I ever let go, but allowing for some minor amount of luxury in life I agree.

..hmm
im wondering, what amp/DAC do you use with your HD 650?

[mr moose]

If you read the article are we even disagreeing? My statement was that a flat frequency response in a headphone is not desirable because it will not give the same sound impression as listening to flat speakers. That is also pretty much the first thing written in the article. And if you look at the raw frequency response of neutral headphones they are very similar to the Head Related Transfer Function. The reason why the have to do subjective testing is also stated, because you can not simply determine the closest to flat speaker sounding Head Related Transfer Function just by measurement. 

 

Second Part for people who are interested in more Here they are not just trying to achieve the most neutral sound but try to find the most preferred headphone frequency response. Still the preferred response turned out to be very close to the measured Head Related Transfer Function. 

 

Also please note how headphone reviewers always use the compensated frequency response to evaluate sounding of a headphone and never the raw frequency response. The compensated response is the raw response divided by the Head Related Transfer Function.

 

Yet this is not what was inferred earlier,  I say this because HRTF, fletcher-munson curves and room response are largely irrelevant,  once a preferred FR is determined then that is what they aim for, there is then no weighting or compensation applied to headphones when manufactured (which is what I got out of your original few posts). there is simply a design process to get as close to the target as possible.  

[Whit3Rav3n]

Yet this is not what was inferred earlier,  I say this because HRTF, fletcher-munson curves and room response are largely irrelevant,  once a preferred FR is determined then that is what they aim for, there is then no weighting or compensation applied to headphones when manufactured (which is what I got out of your original few posts). there is simply a design process to get as close to the target as possible.  

Well my statement was that a neutral sounding headphone has to have a frequency response very similar to the HRTF to imitate the sound of flat speakers. That is pretty much the truth, even though the perfect HRTF can not be determined by measurements alone, the measured HRTF function is still far from irrelevant. It was clearly the starting point for harman for the target curve and the final target curve is not surprisingly pretty close to the measured curves. So the measured HRTF may be irrelevant after a preferred target curve has been established but it is very important in the process.

 

Also I was against any weighting or compansating in my previous posts (other than the target curve for headphones), that was ShearMe that suggested it should be done.

[mr moose]

This is where is started:

 

 

Still if you check the weighted frequency response of the HD 800 it looks pretty good:

Because in my mind the response is not weighted nor should it be.

 

And shearme's response here:

 

 

If you don't calibrate them with weighting, you wont be calibrating them to the Human ear, and then it wont sound like the original instrument.

 

 

Which I assumed he was talking about the design/manufacture process when he said calibrating and not playback/measurement. Which would leave us with a headphone that comes close to the target FR,  Which as I said earlier was compromise between design constraints and FR.  Especially if they are shooting for a bassy headphone. 

[Whit3Rav3n]

This is where is started:

 

Because in my mind the response is not weighted nor should it be.

 

And shearme's response here:

 

 

Which I assumed he was talking about the design/manufacture process when he said calibrating and not playback/measurement. Which would leave us with a headphone that comes close to the target FR,  Which as I said earlier was compromise between design constraints and FR.  Especially if they are shooting for a bassy headphone. 

Ok I used the wrong word there, I meant the compensated response.

 

ShearMe meant that neutral sound is defined by the A-Weighting, so neutral is where the human ear hears every frequency equally loud. My point was that neutral frequency response is where every frequency is physically equally loud (speaking of speakers here) and therefore not determined by what people subjectively find neutral. So many people, especially those who don´t listen to high quality audio equipment find neutral sound bright, thin and boring. And that can very well be the reason why many people don´t like the HD 800 (or other neutral sounding headphones or speakers), neutral sound is boring for them. This is also the reason why most even very expensive hifi loudspeakers don´t aim for flat frequency response.

[EmoRarity]

Thought about my answer a bit longer this time. 7506. 

[Thebman712]

Steelseries h wireless and save the rest for a chair and desk

[ShearMe]

ShearMe meant that neutral sound is defined by the A-Weighting

 

I did not mean A-weighting specifically. For headphones, I do not think a flat-measured frequency response equates to neutral-sounding.

 

My point was that neutral frequency response is where every frequency is physically equally loud (speaking of speakers here) and therefore not determined by what people subjectively find neutral. So many people, especially those who don´t listen to high quality audio equipment find neutral sound bright, thin and boring. 

 

And my original point, was that a "neutral frequency response" has not been unequivocally defined as "every frequency is physically equally loud." We're just playing the audiophile word game here, and neither of us is right or wrong. 

 

 

..hmm

im wondering, what amp/DAC do you use with your HD 650?

 

I've used many in the past, but for now I've settled on the Syba DAC. Questions? c:

[Whit3Rav3n]

 

 

And my original point, was that a "neutral frequency response" has not been unequivocally defined as "every frequency is physically equally loud." We're just playing the audiophile word game here, and neither of us is right or wrong. 

 

 

If we use the most common meaning of neutral sounding which is the recording should be played back as unmodified as possible then it is clear that only a flat frequency response is acceptable as target curve. (for speakers)

 

(It is pretty much the only definition of neutral sound I came across so far)

[ShearMe]

If we use the most common meaning of neutral sounding which is the recording should be played back as unmodified as possible then it is clear that only a flat frequency response is acceptable as target curve. (for speakers)

 

(It is pretty much the only definition of neutral sound I came across so far)

 

Yes, but like you said, "for speakers." My comments have been made in relation to headphones/IEMs.

 

I admit I got a little confused when you switched to talking about speakers early in the conversation, and thought you were referencing the headphone driver.

[Silent_Xaxal]

The Oppo PM-1 or the LCD-2, just so that I won't have to rape my wallet further finding an expensive amp (As is the case with the HD 800).

[BoredErica]

The Oppo PM-1 or the LCD-2, just so that I won't have to rape my wallet further finding an expensive amp (As is the case with the HD 800).

Rape is bad, don't you know?  :unsure:

[creatip123]

The Oppo PM-1 or the LCD-2, just so that I won't have to rape my wallet further finding an expensive amp (As is the case with the HD 800).

 

Never tried the Oppo, but tried the LCD-2, and based on that experience, it (LCD-2) does perform based on the 'bridge'. By 'bridge', I meant stuffs in between the audio file and the headphone itself. Maybe easier if I write what I experienced:

 

Auditioned the LCD-2 in the audition booth in an audio store. It's plugged to few thousand bucks worth of DAC + amp (Audio GD or something for the DAC, and ALO Audio Studio Six for the amp). It sounded heavenly. Out of curiosity, I pulled out my Ipad, with the Fiio E11 or E12 (forgot which) as the amp. It did sound good, but no more than other $300 price level headphones. Not talking about the volume/loudness. The Ipad + Fiio combo drove it loud enough, but just not the same, or not what I'd expect from an around $1000 price level headphone. I don't know if it's the DAC, or the amp, or maybe both that made so much differences. 

 

Experienced the same with my HE400, and with the one I auditioned in the store, the modded T50RP (mad dog or something). So I concluded that planars are quite sensitive to what the 'bridge' are used.....

[Timmyfox]

I've heard of electrostatic speakers (seen them even..) but what? You're telling me there also exist headphones are those actually real?

They are real and apparently there have been many iterations of them as well.

 

Infamously known as one of the world's ugliest headphones. 

Actually really want to try this monstrosity in real life. 

 

Actually, there are electrostats that look really good and more like average high-end headphones made by Stax. The only thing is that those things cost as much as a smaller car.

Personally I use four headphones, all Sennheiser:

 

HD650 for listening to music at home

HD598 for computer use

Momentum for when I go for a walk etc.

IE80 for when I travel.

 

 

Back on topic, if I had about a 1000 dollars to spend on headphones I'd probably look at the Sennheiser HD800, Grado RS1i and Audeze LCD-2.

Gotta agree here for most part!

 

- Just got a pair of HD650's to upgrade my HD598's which are currently sitting right beside my desk next to my new HD650's.

- I got a pair of IE80's, although I didn't like them too much as they were just simply too colored and bassy, I got them to a really nice sound with the aid of an EQ but eventually gave up on them after owning them for about a year as I decided IEM's aren't really for me.

- I replaced said IE80's with a pair of Sennheiser Momentums which are much more pleasant to carry with my in my backpack and doesn't give me the same hassle with the cable and everything like many IEM's do. Also I feel like no IEM really can match a good headphone in terms of comfort.

 

---

As for the topic, HD800's would be my pick, although I think they are prices a tad above $1000 currently. LCD-2 certainly are interesting, but I'm a bit sceptical because I've heard their comfort isn't that great, at least for longer listening sessions and my head kinda requires a very soft and gentle headphone to be comfortable or I just can't wear it. Thus comfort is just as important to me as the sound quality.

 

Also, on the subject of the HD800's being too bright, I can't really confirm or deny this myself but I've seen reports that the HD800's are a quite "picky" with amps and require a lot of power to drive properly. Not really because of that whole debate about subjectivity and 'colored' sources, but rather because even though they are rated at 300Ω they actually seem to peak at over 600Ω in the bass region. I'm not too sure how much that matters, but I've seen claims that say a stronger amp that can handle that peak will better balance the sound and make it more flat/neutral as opposed to sounding too bright.

 

Here's an impedance graph I found comparing them to the HD650:

[Whit3Rav3n]

Actually, there are electrostats that look really good and more like average high-end headphones made by Stax. The only thing is that those things cost as much as a smaller car.

 

Gotta agree here for most part!

 

- Just got a pair of HD650's to upgrade my HD598's which are currently sitting right beside my desk next to my new HD650's.

- I got a pair of IE80's, although I didn't like them too much as they were just simply too colored and bassy, I got them to a really nice sound with the aid of an EQ but eventually gave up on them after owning them for about a year as I decided IEM's aren't really for me.

- I replaced said IE80's with a pair of Sennheiser Momentums which are much more pleasant to carry with my in my backpack and doesn't give me the same hassle with the cable and everything like many IEM's do. Also I feel like no IEM really can match a good headphone in terms of comfort.

 

---

As for the topic, HD800's would be my pick, although I think they are prices a tad above $1000 currently. LCD-2 certainly are interesting, but I'm a bit sceptical because I've heard their comfort isn't that great, at least for longer listening sessions and my head kinda requires a very soft and gentle headphone to be comfortable or I just can't wear it. Thus comfort is just as important to me as the sound quality.

 

Also, on the subject of the HD800's being too bright, I can't really confirm or deny this myself but I've seen reports that the HD800's are a quite "picky" with amps and require a lot of power to drive properly. Not really because of that whole debate about subjectivity and 'colored' sources, but rather because even though they are rated at 300Ω they actually seem to peak at over 600Ω in the bass region. I'm not too sure how much that matters, but I've seen claims that say a stronger amp that can handle that peak will better balance the sound and make it more flat/neutral as opposed to sounding too bright.

 

Here's an impedance graph I found comparing them to the HD650:

 

In theory the impedance peak should not be a problem. The frequency response is measured with constant voltage. There is no drop in the Frequency response at the impedance peak, meaning that the efficiency of the driver is higher at this point. For the amplifier a low impedance minimum would be actually challenging because that would mean the headphone needs more power at this frequency range.

 

I would probably get the LCD-2 for the 1000$ since I already have the HD 800.

[SSL]

snippsters

 

Let's try to dispel the myth that the resonant frequency in dynamic drivers makes them more "picky" with amps or necessitates a more powerful one. A few things:

• Power draw decreases as impedance increases
• Phase angle approaches zero at the resonant frequency, which makes the transducer easier to drive
• The load transitions from capacitive to reactive at around that frequency which also makes it easier to drive

[Timmyfox]

In theory the impedance peak should not be a problem. The frequency response is measured with constant voltage. There is no drop in the Frequency response at the impedance peak, meaning that the efficiency of the driver is higher at this point. For the amplifier a low impedance minimum would be actually challenging because that would mean the headphone needs more power at this frequency range.

 

I would probably get the LCD-2 for the 1000$ since I already have the HD 800.

 

 

 

Let's try to dispel the myth that the resonant frequency in dynamic drivers makes them more "picky" with amps or necessitates a more powerful one. A few things:

• Power draw decreases as impedance increases
• Phase angle approaches zero at the resonant frequency, which makes the transducer easier to drive
• The load transitions from capacitive to reactive at around that frequency which also makes it easier to drive

 

Alright, gotcha.

As I said I don't really know too much about it personally, it's just some statements I've picked up from various places, both forums and reviews of them.

[SSL]

Alright, gotcha.

As I said I don't really know too much about it personally, it's just some statements I've picked up from various places, both forums and reviews of them.

 

Yes, there is a lot of misinformation about audio floating around. In fact the resonant frequency is important when it comes to impedance matching - i.e. if the impedance of the headphones is less than 8x the output impedance of the amp. If this "damping factor" is too small, then the driver will not be sufficiently electrically damped and it will distort the sound - which often this results in too much bass rather than too little. HD 800/650 aren't that susceptible because they are high impedance, but low impedance cans such as the HD 5xx family are.

[BenD]

so , while everyone is discussing.... The conclusion is, if you are willing to spend 1000 on an headphone, test before you buy?

[Whit3Rav3n]

so , while everyone is discussing.... The conclusion is, if you are willing to spend 1000 on an headphone, test before you buy?

That should be the conclusion every time you plan to buy a headphone. Better you should chose 3 preferred headphones and test them before you buy. No one can really predict what headphone in your price range you are going to like best.

[Silent_Xaxal]

Never tried the Oppo, but tried the LCD-2, and based on that experience, it (LCD-2) does perform based on the 'bridge'. By 'bridge', I meant stuffs in between the audio file and the headphone itself. Maybe easier if I write what I experienced:

 

Auditioned the LCD-2 in the audition booth in an audio store. It's plugged to few thousand bucks worth of DAC + amp (Audio GD or something for the DAC, and ALO Audio Studio Six for the amp). It sounded heavenly. Out of curiosity, I pulled out my Ipad, with the Fiio E11 or E12 (forgot which) as the amp. It did sound good, but no more than other $300 price level headphones. Not talking about the volume/loudness. The Ipad + Fiio combo drove it loud enough, but just not the same, or not what I'd expect from an around $1000 price level headphone. I don't know if it's the DAC, or the amp, or maybe both that made so much differences. 

 

Experienced the same with my HE400, and with the one I auditioned in the store, the modded T50RP (mad dog or something). So I concluded that planars are quite sensitive to what the 'bridge' are used.....

At least, from what I've read, it won't be nearly as hard to find good matches for them as opposed to the HD800, which is known to be very picky as far as amps/dacs are concerned.