I'm trying to mix self-composed music in an ITB fashion, the HD555 I've been using aren't really that good for the task. I need recommendations based on:
1. Sub $150 price, based on the industry wide standard for warranty I consider them disposable after the 2 years end.
2. I see that most professional environments demand sound isolation, for my particular scenario where that isn't the case, shouldn't open headphones provide more accurate reproduction?
3. Again, accurate reproduction is the key concern. The HD555 (and I guess the rest of the HDs) has the signature Sennheiser veil, not good for faithful reproduction of the source.
Thank you.
Basically, you want your "monitors" to have flat-smooth frequency response (no big peaks or dips) and you want to cover the whole frequency range. There should be plenty of acceptable headphones in your price range.
After that, it's a matter of
learning your monitors. That means getting familiar with them to the point where you can make a mix that sounds as good as possible on a variety of systems.
That's not easy with headphones... The experts will warn you NOT to mix on headphones! Your HD555s
may work just as well as any other good headphones, once you learn how the sound "translates" to other setups.
From
Recording Magazine:
As those of you who have followed this column for any length of time can attest, headphone mixing is one of the big no-no's around these parts. In our humble opinion, headphone mixes do not translate well in the real world, period, end of story. Other than checking for balance issues and the occasional hunting down of little details, they are tools best left for the tracking process.
Headphones are not easy to specify/measure and the manufacturers sometimes fudge the specs. Opinions & preferences also vary. Read some reviews, go to a store and
listen, choose headphones that sound good to
you and are comfortable to
you.1. Sub $150 price, based on the industry wide standard for warranty I consider them disposable after the 2 years end.
FYI - Koss has a lifetime warranty. But, headphones should last many years in a studio-like environment.
2. I see that most professional environments demand sound isolation, for my particular scenario where that isn't the case, shouldn't open headphones provide more accurate reproduction?
If you don't need isolation, just choose whatever headphones sound the best (or the most natural) to you and are comfortable. (I tend to prefer open headphones.)
3. Again, accurate reproduction is the key concern. The HD555 (and I guess the rest of the HDs) has the signature Sennheiser veil, not good for faithful reproduction of the source.
Maybe you want something with stronger high frequency response... "Veil" is one of those useless audiophile terms that has no meaning in science or engineering. And, it can't be measured or specified. ...How many dB of veil do the Sennheiser's have?
The HD555 (and I guess the rest of the HDs) has the signature Sennheiser veil, not good for faithful reproduction of the source.
After some listening, your brain should get used to the "veil", and won't even notice it.
I don't think this would hamper your ability to mix music , although speakers are usually more appropriate for this.
Otherwise you may ask at head-fi, for "detailed" or "revealing" headphones .
shouldn't open headphones provide more accurate reproduction
Closed headphone try to prevent reflections inside cups, by using dampening materials inside cups (i.e materials that absorb sound).
A more efficient method, would be to just let these "unwanted" sounds, escape on the side (open headphone).
So I think this the theoretical logic that would explain why open headphones should be more accurate.
You can block the sides of your hd555 with your hands of whatever, and get an idea of the limits of such logic.
Imho you can still manage to find a "better" headphone than your hd555 and that is closed (or should I say, that you just appreciate more) .
Personally I got a worse opinion of the hd595, after getting a srh940.
I'm mixing for headphone users, so I don't have to worry about speaker listeners.
Headphones are not easy to specify/measure and the manufacturers sometimes fudge the specs. Opinions & preferences also vary. Read some reviews, go to a store and listen, choose headphones that sound good to you and are comfortable to you.
Can't do that, they only have over-priced/impractical models on display.
FYI - Koss has a lifetime warranty. But, headphones should last many years in a studio-like environment.
I had an extensive look at Koss, they seem to have stopped innovation since the 80s. (other than their portables)
...How many dB of veil do the Sennheiser's have?
Veil is a subjective description, but since it is consistently reported by everyone it isn't really a controversial audiophile fabrication.
Veil is a subjective description, but since it is consistently reported by everyone it isn't really a controversial audiophile fabrication.
I disagree. I have been mixing on HD595s for years now because of a lack of space for proper monitors, checking as often as I could on speakers and of course comparing with real-life sound, as I record classical music mainly, I think they're very accurate. I'd like to know who this 'everyone' refers to, haven't heard anyone about it yet.
Veil is a subjective description, but since it is consistently reported by everyone it isn't really a controversial audiophile fabrication.
I disagree. I have been mixing on HD595s for years now because of a lack of space for proper monitors, checking as often as I could on speakers and of course comparing with real-life sound, as I record classical music mainly, I think they're very accurate. I'd like to know who this 'everyone' refers to, haven't heard anyone about it yet.
Well, I don't how the "veil" could be explained scientifically, but this is something I notice when I switch to other headphones (that seems to have more "clarity").
Perhaps it's just that the other headphones have some boosted treble, but I 'm not fully convinced by such trivial explanation.
Otherwise, the hd595/hd555 are fine for mixing, I guess.
I'm using Sennheiser HD280 right now, EQ'ed according to Rins measurement (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-xqJcCQU4jwY/Ugkr6Rm-uuI/AAAAAAAAIFA/UToaVfuKXnw/s1600/ow.jpg) and I captured stereo impulses from xnors crossfeed that I insert on the stereo buss in my DAW. My speakers are Alesis M1 in a semi-treated room. Translateability has been rather good so far but I always check a mix on speakers before making any final decisions.
Edit:Grammar
Personally I got a worse opinion of the hd595, after getting a srh940.
I think I still prefer circumaurial open headphones.
I'm using Sennheiser HD280 right now, EQ'ed according to Rins measurement and I captured stereo impulses from xnors crossfeed that I insert on the stereo buss in my DAW. My speakers are Alesis M1 in a semi-treated room. Translateability has been rather good so far but I always check a mix on speakers before making any final decisions.
I heard them in a store, but they sounded lacking in terms of positioning.
Are there any open headphones that are regularly used (other than Sennheisers) by the professional community?
>I heard them in a store, but they sounded lacking in terms of positioning.
Wouldn't you agree listening conditions were different than what I described though?
>Are there any open headphones that are regularly used (other than Sennheisers) by the professional community?
None which are within your budget.
Are there any open headphones that are regularly used (other than Sennheisers) by the professional community?
Beyerdynamics headphones are for some reason the first brand to come to mind . So you might want a DT990, which is open.
The semi open DT880 is more popular though ...
I'm mixing for headphone users, so I don't have to worry about speaker listeners.
In that case, your HD555s should be fine. Your listeners will be using a variety of headphones. When you're doing music production
the goal is NOT to get the best monitors/headphones you can buy and then make the mix sound great on your headphones, or only for listeners with high-end headphones. The goal would be to make it sound as good as possible on whatever the listener is using, without compromising the sound for listeners that have very-good headphones. You can't do that with lousy headphones, but you don't need the best headphones in the world either.
The only way to do that is to check your mix on every headphone, earbud, and IEM you can get your hands on. That's what the pros do... They check their mix on small speakers (or cheap monitors), on good headphones, cheap headphones, earbuds, on a boombox, in their car, on their home stereo, etc. With experience, you should learn what a good mix sounds like on your main monitoring/mixing headphones, and you won't need to do as much back-and-forth and tweaking to make a mix that sounds good everywhere (or on all headphones). Most mixing engineers avoid upgrading their monitors, because they've learned to make a good mix on the monitors they know.
Now, if you want better/different headphones for listening pleasure, that's fine too! ...But once several years ago, I was getting bored with my headphones and I went to the store to listen to some better (more expensive) headphones. When I listened at the store, nothing sounded as good as the ones I already had. So I didn't buy anything, and I used those headphones 'till they died.
but I 'm not fully convinced by such trivial explanation.
I wouldn't use the word
trivial, I'd say frequency response is
fundamental. In fact, frequency response accounts for
most of the difference in sound between different headphones & speakers. (As long as you don't drive your speakers/headphones into audible distortion.) Even things like dispersion & directivity (for speakers) are related to off-axis vs. on-axis frequency response.
Of the 4 characteristics that describe sound quality (noise, distortion, frequency response, and timing) I'd
guess veil is most related to frequency response. It's
something in the high frequencies, right???? ...Maybe distortion (or the
lack of distortion) is heard as a veil, but I doubt that's the issue.
These audiophile terms carry a lot of baggage... Some audiophile might be perfectly happy with the best amplifier he can buy. Then a newer more-expensive model comes out and, "A veil is lifted". And of course when a blind ABX test is done and he can't identify which amp is which, the test is "flawed".
I had an extensive look at Koss, they seem to have stopped innovation since the 80s.
I'm not recommending Koss. It just seems like relibility may be a consideration for you.
But, there really hasn't been much innovation in headphones in the past... I dunno... 50 years? Maybe some different materials, but a dynamic headphone driver is still a "small speaker". Just a coil of wire around a magnet, connected to a diaphragm that moves air.
We still have the same 'ol 2-way & 3-way speaker designs too, except now the woofer/subwoofer is often in a separate box.
Of the 4 characteristics that describe sound quality (noise, distortion, frequency response, and timing) I'd guess veil is most related to frequency response. It's something in the high frequencies, right???? ...Maybe distortion (or the lack of distortion) is heard as a veil, but I doubt that's the issue.
To which category correspond the impulse response ? How do you measure reaction of headphones to transients ?
Beside being described as "veiled" , sennheiser headphones (well, the hd5xx & hd6xx range ), they are also described as slow or sluggish.
For some reasons they are unsatisfying with fast paced music, and no amount of eq seems fix this.
I think this "slowness" , and the veil are both related.
It's just like listening everything through a subtle reverb, except that you can't get rid of it .
side note: some head-fier are convinced that a good amp, makes all the difference regarding the "veil".
@Benliq -- Have a look at this thread. The replies were very helpful.
5 years on and I'd still make the same purchase.
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=67751 (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=67751)
The posts by WmAx were the most helpful to me.
C.
@Benliq -- Have a look at this thread. The replies were very helpful.
5 years on and I'd still make the same purchase.
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=67751 (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=67751)
The posts by WmAx were the most helpful to me.
C.
Thanks for sharing your experience!
When I listened at the store, nothing sounded as good as the ones I already had. So I didn't buy anything, and I used those headphones 'till they died.
I know what you mean, I had the HD600s which sounded nearly identical to the 555s.
Are the Inner-Fidelity graphs reliable? How does the V6 look here
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/SonyMDRV6.pdf (http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/SonyMDRV6.pdf)
"Veiled" is a favorite term of audiophile headphone reviewers since they can't be called on it, similarly to "soundstage", and if for some reason the collective consciousness and "in group" deems a certain headphone "veiled", yet the reviewer said quite the opposite, they simply invoke the "But everyone has different hearing" escape clause.
Might find this useful info too (if you go the Sony route):
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/53489-...adphones#548221 (http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/53489-6-looking-sound-isolating-headphones#548221)
C.
Might find this useful info too (if you go the Sony route):
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/53489-...adphones#548221 (http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/53489-6-looking-sound-isolating-headphones#548221)
C.
Same say, I believe this is the first video of the review I am talking about http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJh8B1QfEn0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJh8B1QfEn0), the MDR-V6 are slightly better.
Sennheiser HD-280 PRO. Avoid the HD-380, they sound completely different and not flat IMO.
Anyone familiar with this headphone? It looks like an open headphone, and Shure seems to have warranty plans beyond the 2 year initial coverage.
http://www.amazon.com/Shure-SRH1440-Profes...ords=shure+1440 (http://www.amazon.com/Shure-SRH1440-Professional-Headphones-Black/dp/B0073P4ESO/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1383109341&sr=1-1&keywords=shure+1440)
I've just had a realization, one of the biggest aspects of what I called accurate was a quick and controlled bass. Apparently closed headphones have "tighter" bases, so my dissatisfaction with the HD555 may as well be its open-design. I thought closed headphones had loose, rumbling bass. I need to have the low frequency notes heard clearly, and not swallowed into a giant rumble.
In that case, do the HD280s or the MDRV6es have more defined basses?
Edit:
Has anyone tried these?
http://www.koss.com/en/products/headphones..._Size_Headphone (http://www.koss.com/en/products/headphones/full_size_headphones/PRO4AAT__PRO4AAT_Full_Size_Headphone)
my dissatisfaction with the HD555 may as well be its open-design. I thought closed headphones had loose, rumbling bass. I need to have the low frequency notes heard clearly, and not swallowed into a giant rumble.
Unless the HD555 have been changed since I bought them many years ago, they have extraordinary bass response. Other phones I've tried are always way too bassy and boomy, while the 555 delivers bass that is perfectly audible, distortion-free and doesn't drown the rest of the music.
I thought closed headphones had loose, rumbling bass. I need to have the low frequency notes heard clearly, and not swallowed into a giant rumble.
Well from my experience with the hd595 (open) , hd800 (open) , srh940 (closed), hd25 II 1 (closed) , the trick is that you "feel" better the bass when it's closed.
What does "feeling" actually involve ?
I can only make hypothesis:
- I may need some low level of distortion/ noise to realize the presence of bass (from ear cup reflections ).
- the "pressure" of bass sound waves on ear drums, is perhaps more efficient when there's closed cups.
It's interesting for instance, that you'd find some people complaining that the hd800 is "lacking" bass. And some finding a "cheap remedy", by inserting cloth strip inside ear cups :
http://www.head-fi.org/t/446585/hd800-modification-thread (http://www.head-fi.org/t/446585/hd800-modification-thread)
The more "expensive remedy", would be to try different non-transparent sources...
I actually "feel" better the bass , when using iems (which I guess transfer better the pressure of bass sound waves on ears drums).
If you are undecided between a closed and open solution I suggest you either get the reputed semi-open dt 880 , or the more recent Beyerdynamic Custom One Pro (that can be both closed and open).
To which category correspond the impulse response ? How do you measure reaction of headphones to transients ?
In theory, you can measure
frequency response with an impulse. I don't think that's actually practical,* but I believe a mathematician could reverse the process and predict the impulse response from the frequency response.
A transient is a time-related event, and
Frequency = 1/Time (where time is the period of one cycle).
A peak in frequency response will result in transient ringing (or ringing on the rising/falling edges of a square wave). A loss of high frequency response will reduce the amplitude of an impulse and cause curving of the rising/falling edges of a square wave.
* A theoretical impulse has infinite amplitude and zero time duration. Both of those are impossible in the real world. There are obviously limits to amplitude (voltage) you can apply to a headphone, and as you reduce the width, you get less energy and it's my understanding that you don't get enough energy to get a good frequency response measurement.
Well from my experience with the hd595 (open) , hd800 (open) , srh940 (closed), hd25 II 1 (closed) , the trick is that you "feel" better the bass when it's closed.
What does "feeling" actually involve ?
I can only make hypothesis:
- I may need some low level of distortion/ noise to realize the presence of bass (from ear cup reflections ).
- the "pressure" of bass sound waves on ear drums, is perhaps more efficient when there's closed cups.
Ah, I see. That was a misperception of mine.
Another problem with the HD555s I observed is its inability to produce soundstage because it does not place the sound at the centre of your head. The sound is always to the left and right of my head, just an inch from my ears. This means I am conscious that the "sonic world" is being faked by 2 separate, locatable sources.
However, some headphones that aggressively drive the sound into your head do not produce what I call "soundstage" either...
Another problem with the HD555s I observed is its inability to produce soundstage because it does not place the sound at the centre of your head. The sound is always to the left and right of my head, just an inch from my ears. This means I am conscious that the "sonic world" is being faked by 2 separate, locatable sources.
However, some headphones that aggressively drive the sound into your head do not produce what I call "soundstage" either...
I don't get it, are you constrasting these two properties with regards to soundstage? What's an aggressive driving headphone anyway?
Another problem with the HD555s I observed is its inability to produce soundstage because it does not place the sound at the centre of your head. The sound is always to the left and right of my head, just an inch from my ears. This means I am conscious that the "sonic world" is being faked by 2 separate, locatable sources.
However, some headphones that aggressively drive the sound into your head do not produce what I call "soundstage" either...
I don't get it, are you constrasting these two properties with regards to soundstage? What's an aggressive driving headphone anyway?
Which two properties?
I was using the term "aggressive" to refer to headphones without the "surround reflector" or angled drivers in some headphones (like the HD555) that do not shoot the sound directly into your ears.
Another problem with the HD555s I observed is its inability to produce soundstage because it does not place the sound at the centre of your head. The sound is always to the left and right of my head, just an inch from my ears. This means I am conscious that the "sonic world" is being faked by 2 separate, locatable sources.
However, some headphones that aggressively drive the sound into your head do not produce what I call "soundstage" either...
I don't get it, are you constrasting these two properties with regards to soundstage? What's an aggressive driving headphone anyway?
Which two properties?
I was using the term "aggressive" to refer to headphones without the "surround reflector" or angled drivers in some headphones (like the HD555) that do not shoot the sound directly into your ears.
HD800s have a deflective mesh, some praise if for it's soundstage, others find it an icepick to the ears. You can't really pin down how headphones will sound to you to a single construction aspect.
A transient is a time-related event, and Frequency = 1/Time (where time is the period of one cycle).
Well (unless I've misunderstood) you seem to imply that headphone reaction to transients , could be deduced just by studying the frequency response; but then I would disagree.
Anyways, I have also in mind some dsp / vst that allows to shape transients, and if we could do the same just by using eq ; then such such dsp/ vst wouldn't be available.
@benliq
Another problem with the HD555s I observed is its inability to produce soundstage because it does not place the sound at the center of your head. The sound is always to the left and right of my head, just an inch from my ears. This means I am conscious that the "sonic world" is being faked by 2 separate, locatable sources.
I thought this issue was worse with a hd800 (i.e sound seems distant on left and right, and it's not always easy to recreate the "sonic image" inside head). This issue can be avoided with music produced specifically for headphones, or tamed by using dsp such like crossfeed.
I thought this issue was worse with a hd800 (i.e sound seems distant on left and right, and it's not always easy to recreate the "sonic image" inside head). This issue can be avoided with music produced specifically for headphones, or tamed by using dsp such like crossfeed.
The place near me wouldn't let customers listen to its 800 because they put it inside a display case, so thanks for the impressions.
I can't really produce music with "system requirements" that include a list of specific dsps and settings to listen with, so that is a no go.
Do you know if certain types of headphone constructions can alleviate this problem? (i.e. not headphone quality, but a conscious design choice like open v.s. closed)
Do you know if certain types of headphone constructions can alleviate this problem? (i.e. not headphone quality, but a conscious design choice like open v.s. closed)
I was a bit surprised that you got already the problem with the hd555 .... Well, subjectively "big soundstage" and "disjointed image", might go together. I also thought that what you call "veil" in the hd555 , helps to mitigate/hide the unpleasing sensation of a "disjointed image".
Imho, if you want a sound signature similar to the hd555, but "without the veil" , then you should try a hd800.
Otherwise you can't ignore the fact that headphones makes you listen completely separated audio signals.
Even if you don't plan to use crossfeed, it's interesting to understand the theory behind it.
xnor provide a short explanation here:
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=90764 (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=90764)
Also I'll remind that most produced music, are tested with speakers.
I'm trying to mix self-composed music in an ITB fashion, the HD555 I've been using aren't really that good for the task. I need recommendations based on:
1. Sub $150 price, based on the industry wide standard for warranty I consider them disposable after the 2 years end.
You're talking headphones such as the Sony MDR 7506, Sennheiser HD 280, Audio Technica ATH M50, etc.
2. I see that most professional environments demand sound isolation, for my particular scenario where that isn't the case, shouldn't open headphones provide more accurate reproduction?
The first artificial limit you seem to be putting on your choices is that you seem to want the headphones to please your other preferences without adjustments to channel balance, equalization, etc.
That is very old school thinking. For example later on in the thread, people are complaining about headphones that shift the soundstage. That's usually due to something that a slight adjustment to a balance control would fix. I'll bet that their audio systems don't even have balance controls, or they don't know where the one they have is controlled. If your system has an analog volume control it probably makes audible shifts in balance over its range. Don't be held hostage by them!
3. Again, accurate reproduction is the key concern. The HD555 (and I guess the rest of the HDs) has the signature Sennheiser veil, not good for faithful reproduction of the source.
I've owned a number of different model Sennheiser headphones through the HD 580s and I don't know what you are talking about. I'm listening to a pair of Senn digital wireless phones right now. They sound great to me and there's a dedicated pro grade 30 band equalizer in the signal chain that drives them.
I hear a lot of confusion about preferences and accuracy. They often aren't the same thing. If you want a reproduction system that suits your preferences, you are probably going to adjust some tone control or equalizer some place. Churinng headphone makes and models trying to suit your prejudices about what you think accuracy is makes no sense.
For example later on in the thread, people are complaining about headphones that shift the soundstage. That's usually due to something that a slight adjustment to a balance control would fix.
I don't think it was related to an unbalance between left & right.
I've owned a number of different model Sennheiser headphones through the HD 580s and I don't know what you are talking about.
Great for you, it's one less reason to nitpick.
I hear a lot of confusion about preferences and accuracy. They often aren't the same thing.
I agree. Although we don't have always a clear idea of what's accurate , regarding headphones.
You're talking headphones such as the Sony MDR 7506, Sennheiser HD 280, Audio Technica ATH M50, etc.
Are they all equally good?
The first artificial limit you seem to be putting on your choices is that you seem to want the headphones to please your other preferences without adjustments to channel balance, equalization, etc.
That is very old school thinking. For example later on in the thread, people are complaining about headphones that shift the soundstage. That's usually due to something that a slight adjustment to a balance control would fix. I'll bet that their audio systems don't even have balance controls, or they don't know where the one they have is controlled. If your system has an analog volume control it probably makes audible shifts in balance over its range. Don't be held hostage by them!
Well, some concrete issues are:
1. Deciding on the panning is now nearly impossible, because I have to imagine a soundstage by piecing together the left and right sides. A soundstage should have been an sensory trick, that comes to you unwittingly like an optical illusion.
2. Sometimes melodies that are not just filler go lower down the bass than the HD555 likes. In these cases when it sounds soft and less articulate, how do you decide whether that is an equipment problem or whether you should add yet more dynamics to the track?
I've owned a number of different model Sennheiser headphones through the HD 580s and I don't know what you are talking about. I'm listening to a pair of Senn digital wireless phones right now. They sound great to me and there's a dedicated pro grade 30 band equalizer in the signal chain that drives them.
Sennheiser models differ significantly, I once had an HD600 that mitigated a lot of the problems of the HD555. My experience with the HD650 was the worst out of all Sennheiser headphones by a long shot. In addition, Sennheiser gear have very poor build qualities, other than the "veil" the next signature feature from them is the unequal volume projected by the two drivers. No $10 headphone from any other brand I've listened to had such a serious difference in volume.
You're talking headphones such as the Sony MDR 7506, Sennheiser HD 280, Audio Technica ATH M50, etc.
Are they all equally good?
In the cosmic scheme of things, they are competitive. I doubt that anybody (besides me) would say they are equally good, but many would probably have a preference for one or two.
The first artificial limit you seem to be putting on your choices is that you seem to want the headphones to please your other preferences without adjustments to channel balance, equalization, etc.
That is very old school thinking. For example later on in the thread, people are complaining about headphones that shift the soundstage. That's usually due to something that a slight adjustment to a balance control would fix. I'll bet that their audio systems don't even have balance controls, or they don't know where the one they have is controlled. If your system has an analog volume control it probably makes audible shifts in balance over its range. Don't be held hostage by them!
Well, some concrete issues are:
1. Deciding on the panning is now nearly impossible, because I have to imagine a soundstage by piecing together the left and right sides. A soundstage should have been an sensory trick, that comes to you unwittingly like an optical illusion.
Soundstages are not mystical. People like me set them up by positioning mics and panning sources. I think you hope to do the same, and if you want to do that you have to stop thinking of them as complex and mystical.
One of the common golden ear challenges is that measurements can't characterize equipment performance because they can't measure soundstaging. My response is that it is true that measuring a real world soundstage on a recording is impossible, but if one reproduces that recording without audibly adding distortion, changing frequency response, timing, and levels then the soundstage is perfectly preserved.
Simple test signals can help you test the soundstaging of a computer audio system. For example if you play pink noise where the two channels are equal through headphones, the in-your-head image should be perfectly centered and if it is off to one side you can center it with a balance control and that is the right thing to do. If the two channels of pink noise are uncorrelated or independent of each other you get a completely different soundstage that is very diffuse like a blob, but again you can center the blob with a balance control or by matching levels on the two channels.
You can make your own test signals with Audacity.
2. Sometimes melodies that are not just filler go lower down the bass than the HD555 likes. In these cases when it sounds soft and less articulate, how do you decide whether that is an equipment problem or whether you should add yet more dynamics to the track?
What do you mean by "Go lower down the bass than the HD 555 likes"? Does the HD 555 distort heavy bass? or is the distortion coming from the headphone amplifier? As far as equipment problems go, you have to learn how to distinguish real problems from areas of performance that don't suit your preferences. That takes experience and diagnosis.
I've owned a number of different model Sennheiser headphones through the HD 580s and I don't know what you are talking about. I'm listening to a pair of Senn digital wireless phones right now. They sound great to me and there's a dedicated pro grade 30 band equalizer in the signal chain that drives them.
Sennheiser models differ significantly, I once had an HD600 that mitigated a lot of the problems of the HD555. My experience with the HD650 was the worst out of all Sennheiser headphones by a long shot. In addition, Sennheiser gear have very poor build qualities, other than the "veil" the next signature feature from them is the unequal volume projected by the two drivers. No $10 headphone from any other brand I've listened to had such a serious difference in volume.
If I had headphones that were out-of-balance, Id ensure that the out-of-balance condition was an actual fault of the headphones by making up a headphone cable that tied the two channels together or ran them off of the same channel. If they were out of balance with that cable then the headphones would be defective, and need repair or replacement.
I can't believe that HD650s usually come fresh out of the box with drivers that have different sensitivities and were out of balance. I've never had that happen with any headphones that I've purchased and I've owned several dozen different headphones. Were they used?
In the cosmic scheme of things, they are competitive. I doubt that anybody (besides me) would say they are equally good, but many would probably have a preference for one or two.
Are they more accurate than the HD555 I'm using now?
Simple test signals can help you test the soundstaging of a computer audio system. For example if you play pink noise where the two channels are equal through headphones, the in-your-head image should be perfectly centered and if it is off to one side you can center it with a balance control and that is the right thing to do. If the two channels of pink noise are uncorrelated or independent of each other you get a completely different soundstage that is very diffuse like a blob, but again you can center the blob with a balance control or by matching levels on the two channels.
You can make your own test signals with Audacity.
I'll get on it.
What do you mean by "Go lower down the bass than the HD 555 likes"? Does the HD 555 distort heavy bass? or is the distortion coming from the headphone amplifier? As far as equipment problems go, you have to learn how to distinguish real problems from areas of performance that don't suit your preferences. That takes experience and diagnosis.
There is no amplifier, more like computers and mp3 players. When the bass is unclear I assume it is the headphone's fault.
I can't believe that HD650s usually come fresh out of the box with drivers that have different sensitivities and were out of balance. I've never had that happen with any headphones that I've purchased and I've owned several dozen different headphones. Were they used?
I meant the veil on the 650 was worse than the 555. But I thought the volume discrepancy of Sennheiser was well accepted?
In the cosmic scheme of things, they are competitive. I doubt that anybody (besides me) would say they are equally good, but many would probably have a preference for one or two.
Are they more accurate than the HD555 I'm using now?
I was looking for studio monitors and ended up going with Audio-Technica ATH-M50 instead due to budget constraints and the versatility of what I would say are some pretty decent headphones for the price.
I haven't been able to compare them directly with other headphones of the same quality range but they beat the manure out of an old pair of "colored" headphones I have in the sense that they are way more neutral and have a nicely balanced bass. But it all becomes pretty subjective and as people have pointed out. What is important is how trained your ears are since you need to review your productions on various setups to confirm that the mix is good.
My personal experience with the ATH-M50 in terms of durability is good. With less time for actual music production they have become my all round headphone and travel with me to and from college, either on my head or in my bag and has yet to fail me being well past warranty at this point.
The biggest thing for me is the overall clarity and the representation of the music I listen to. It took some time to get used to but now they enable me to hear clear differences in production quality of songs and bring out nuances I haven't noticed before. I can hear when there are muddled mixes/productions, open vast soundscapes, well balanced productions, and with a little drive on the volume they reproduce sub-bass quite nicely without being overpowering. I have had many eureka moments of noticing techniques that were invisible to me listening on speakers or inferior headphones. They also work equally well for listening to metal as well as electronic or acoustic music. And I would presume that can translate well to being transparent in a production/mixing scenario.
If you are able to get a shop to let you try them and compare them to what you have now with your own selected songs I would highly recommend it.
Ok so I ended up with the HD380, and I feel it is an improvement detail wise.
Thanks for the help.
2. Sometimes melodies that are not just filler go lower down the bass than the HD555 likes. In these cases when it sounds soft and less articulate, how do you decide whether that is an equipment problem or whether you should add yet more dynamics to the track?
What do you mean by "Go lower down the bass than the HD 555 likes"? Does the HD 555 distort heavy bass? or is the distortion coming from the headphone amplifier? As far as equipment problems go, you have to learn how to distinguish real problems from areas of performance that don't suit your preferences. That takes experience and diagnosis.
I believe it means the 555 doesn't explode with boominess. It's actually a property of the 555 I enjoy a lot because it doesn't rumble my brain out while still making pretty much every bass note audible.
I meant the veil on the 650 was worse than the 555. But I thought the volume discrepancy of Sennheiser was well accepted?
What is veil? I can only interpret that word as reduced mids or highs, but that's not my experience at all.
2. Sometimes melodies that are not just filler go lower down the bass than the HD555 likes. In these cases when it sounds soft and less articulate, how do you decide whether that is an equipment problem or whether you should add yet more dynamics to the track?
What do you mean by "Go lower down the bass than the HD 555 likes"? Does the HD 555 distort heavy bass? or is the distortion coming from the headphone amplifier? As far as equipment problems go, you have to learn how to distinguish real problems from areas of performance that don't suit your preferences. That takes experience and diagnosis.
I believe it means the 555 doesn't explode with boominess. It's actually a property of the 555 I enjoy a lot because it doesn't rumble my brain out while still making pretty much every bass note audible.
Why is there so much resistance just putting a good eq in line with the phones?
If the boominess is exposive, just back off response around 30-50 Hz...
Why is there so much resistance just putting a good eq in line with the phones?
If the boominess is exposive, just back off response around 30-50 Hz...
I'd need that EQ system-wide, and the EQ provided by the sound card software is never good enough; mostly due to offering a paltry 10 bands or something-- if there's any EQ at all. The alternative is simply buying headphones that you like, which is something you should do
anyway, so there's no point in adding an EQ on top of good-sounding phones.
And if you deliberately bought bad-sounding phones, well, I don't know what to tell you.
This might be interesting to you:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/equalizerapo/ (http://sourceforge.net/projects/equalizerapo/)
(assuming you run modern Windows anyway)
Why is there so much resistance just putting a good eq in line with the phones?
If the boominess is explosive, just back off response around 30-50 Hz...
I'd need that EQ system-wide, and the EQ provided by the sound card software is never good enough; mostly due to offering a paltry 10 bands or something-- if there's any EQ at all.
I use a professional analog eq buffered into an inexpensive headphone amp.
The alternative is simply buying headphones that you like, which is something you should do anyway,
"simply"? Surely you jest! ;-) I see a ton of angst about headphone purchases.
so there's no point in adding an EQ on top of good-sounding phones.
Good sounding phones can be a moving target, what with changes in sources, program material, and preferences.
And if you deliberately bought bad-sounding phones, well, I don't know what to tell you.
Thanks for insulting my intelligence. It helps me get your viewpoint!
Surely you jest! ;-)
I am known to jest now and then.
And if you deliberately bought bad-sounding phones, well, I don't know what to tell you.
Thanks for insulting my intelligence. It helps me get your viewpoint!
Sorry, I meant the general you, not you specifically.
This might be interesting to you:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/equalizerapo/ (http://sourceforge.net/projects/equalizerapo/)
Thanks, it is interesting to ME.
(A bit surprised by German messages that I cannot read ... probably due to German resource in it having higher precedence over English one).
This might be interesting to you:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/equalizerapo/ (http://sourceforge.net/projects/equalizerapo/)
(assuming you run modern Windows anyway)
I'll have a look, thanks.