The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
What are your favorite headphones in the mastering room.
Old 8th November 2022 | Show parent
  #1741
Lives for gear
 
DrAudioBot's Avatar
 
2 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by hello people ➡️
Right. Thing is, I'd read over and over how great the HD600's were for mixing. I finally bought a set and instantly found that they just felt overblown in the low end. I'm talking anywhere around 100hz-300hz or so, roughly. Very roughly that area. That's how they seem to me. They are similar in that regard (but even worse I think) to the Beyer dt880's, which I also have. I just expected a little more of an even, tight sound from the 600's. Not this overblown low end. I don't get why I read so many recommendations for the 600's to be great for mixing when in use they seem to really blow out the low end.

I'm the first one to put my hand up and say I'm doing it wrong or I'm using them wrong or my mixes are poorly defined in the low end etc. It still puzzles me that on the freq charts the 600's show low end roll off...yet seem to me to be low end wooly.

The idea of going into the thousands of dollars for headphones really blows my mind and is just not something I'd ever entertain. So I have to settle for Sony MDR7506, HD600's, Beyer dt880's, 770's and several others etc. Which I guess, ha, add up to the price of one top notch headphone. But this is the general business model with audio gear. The idea is for you to buy cheap stuff that you constantly upgrade. First it's a $100 headphone, then $250, $350, $500 etc. By the time you're done, you've spent the $1500 or $2000 at Sweetwater that you could have just spent on 1 great headphone.
The low end of my DT-880's was quiet okay but I hated the rest and it was absolutely impossible to make any decisions on these (Beyer-peak was insane, general width/soundstage was extremely confusing to me). HD 600 works much, much better. Slight bump below 60Hz, little dip at 150Hz and I am totally happy with them. I also prefer the more "dry" sound compared to Beyers. Sold the 880's recently and have no regrets.

I use https://eqmac.app/ to EQ my headphones by the way.
Old 8th November 2022 | Show parent
  #1742
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrAudioBot ➡️
The low end of my DT-880's was quiet okay but I hated the rest and it was absolutely impossible to make any decisions on these (Beyer-peak was insane, general width/soundstage was extremely confusing to me). HD 600 works much, much better. Slight bump below 60Hz, little dip at 150Hz and I am totally happy with them. I also prefer the more "dry" sound compared to Beyers. Sold the 880's recently and have no regrets.

I use https://eqmac.app/ to EQ my headphones by the way.
I think the 600's are a bit more dry, yeah. That's a good way to put it. I never get much of a sense of the peaks in either phone. I seem to need Sony MDR 7506 or something for that. Maybe my high freq hearing is not so good any more. Maybe I should just mix into a simple corrective eq for the 600's that tone down a little of the 100-400hz bump.
Old 8th November 2022 | Show parent
  #1743
Lives for gear
 
DrAudioBot's Avatar
 
2 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by hello people ➡️
I think the 600's are a bit more dry, yeah. That's a good way to put it. I never get much of a sense of the peaks in either phone. I seem to need Sony MDR 7506 or something for that. Maybe my high freq hearing is not so good any more. Maybe I should just mix into a simple corrective eq for the 600's that tone down a little of the 100-400hz bump.
Sure, give it a try.

This might be a good starting point too, using Tokyo Dawns Mastering EQ: Headphone EQ chain for HD600
Old 19th December 2022 | Show parent
  #1744
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 10 years
HD 800s vs Beyerdynamic 1990 vs?

Hi all, I have the beyerdynamic 1990 pro , They are nice headphones looking to upgrade to the next level whatever that means. I am looking for more clarity particularly in the high end. I use my cans 20 % mastering, 80% pleasure listening. I am using a Neve headphone amp.
Right now the Sennheiser 800s are being discounted. Do you guys think it is a significant upgrade? Any other recommendations?
Old 19th December 2022 | Show parent
  #1745
Lives for gear
 
Glenn Bucci's Avatar
 
46 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by echo44 ➡️
Hi all, I have the beyerdynamic 1990 pro , They are nice headphones looking to upgrade to the next level whatever that means. I am looking for more clarity particularly in the high end. I use my cans 20 % mastering, 80% pleasure listening. I am using a Neve headphone amp.
Right now the Sennheiser 800s are being discounted. Do you guys think it is a significant upgrade? Any other recommendations?
I have the 1990's also. I really like the big sound stage and detail in the high end they provide however as a result they can sound a little thin. I went with the Focal Clear MG's and I have been very happy with them. There is more meat to the music, a fuller sound and they definitely are a step up. The high end sounds natural though it takes a little time to get used to. Once I got to know the high end, adjusting my mixes has been very good. The sound stage is closer up than the 1990's. Sometimes I like the bigger sound stage but generally the Focal's are my main choice. Oh there is also less ear fatigue with the slightly reduced high's.
Old 19th December 2022 | Show parent
  #1746
iFi audio
 
iFi audio's Avatar
 
Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenn Bucci ➡️
I have the 1990's also. I really like the big sound stage and detail in the high end they provide however as a result they can sound a little thin. I went with the Focal Clear MG's and I have been very happy with them. There is more meat to the music, a fuller sound and they definitely are a step up. The high end sounds natural though it takes a little time to get used to. Once I got to know the high end, adjusting my mixes has been very good. The sound stage is closer up than the 1990's. Sometimes I like the bigger sound stage but generally the Focal's are my main choice. Oh there is also less ear fatigue with the slightly reduced high's.
Focal is a quality, consistent brand, though I've known them most popularly to be the choice selection of audiophiles. As you find them useful for mastering, do you feel they are a flatter, more honest frequency response or is it more attenuated in sound signature? I haven't tried the MG's, but I have tried the new Bathys and Celestee's, both quality pieces for intended function, but I felt they were a little "too much fun" to accurately mix with.
Old 21st December 2022 | Show parent
  #1747
Lives for gear
 
Glenn Bucci's Avatar
 
46 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
The Bathys are bluetooth headphones and not high fidelity headphones. I find the Focal Clear MG's provide a great representation that when the music sounds good on them, they pretty much sound on many other sources. They are not flat headphones, and if they did, they probably would not sound good. With that being said, they don't create ear fatigue with a hyped top end and they also do not provide a overexaggerated sound stage like some headphones. The sound stage is in the center and everything is heard well. They also feel very high quality with excellent material.
Old 21st December 2022 | Show parent
  #1748
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 10 years
Does anyone have an opinion on the Sennheiser 800s?
Old 21st December 2022 | Show parent
  #1749
Lives for gear
 
thermos's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by echo44 ➡️
Does anyone have an opinion on the Sennheiser 800s?
I only tried them a bit. Really really really wide soundstage, not much low end (unless you get the s model) and an icepick high freq somewhere. They are good though, if you eq them I bet you could do great work on them. I mastered quite a few records on HD600 with sonar works correction before falling down the headphone rabbit hole.
Old 22nd December 2022
  #1750
Lives for gear
 
Verified Member
🎧 10 years
Yo. I'm starting to look into some headphones suitable for EQ checking and potentially using during downtime or any disruptions which stop me using my Focal Trios which I love and use for about 8 hours a day.

First choice is Clear MG Pros.

https://www.focal.com/headphones/clear-mg-professional/

Has anyone had a chance to use these for any length of time? I really like sticking with companies and I have a good long time relationship with Focals reps in the UK so I'm starting by looking at their pro headphones, which is currently a fairly small range still.
Amp wise I use an RME ADI 2 pro FS which is very flexible with different headphones designs and is known for giving a very low noise and fairly flat response.

I listened to some Clear MGs in a local high end AV shop, but it was thru a fairly "hifi warm" streaming box and I felt the stereo image was incredible and then mid range was very very flat, but the low end felt a bit overly fluffed up thru this amp.
Old 22nd December 2022 | Show parent
  #1751
Lives for gear
 
huejahfink's Avatar
 
Verified Member
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe_caithness ➡️
Yo. I'm starting to look into some headphones suitable for EQ checking and potentially using during downtime or any disruptions which stop me using my Focal Trios which I love and use for about 8 hours a day.

First choice is Clear MG Pros.

https://www.focal.com/headphones/clear-mg-professional/

Has anyone had a chance to use these for any length of time? I really like sticking with companies and I have a good long time relationship with Focals reps in the UK so I'm starting by looking at their pro headphones, which is currently a fairly small range still.
Amp wise I use an RME ADI 2 pro FS which is very flexible with different headphones designs and is known for giving a very low noise and fairly flat response.

I listened to some Clear MGs in a local high end AV shop, but it was thru a fairly "hifi warm" streaming box and I felt the stereo image was incredible and then mid range was very very flat, but the low end felt a bit overly fluffed up thru this amp.
Ask your rep contact if they have a loaner pair maybe, Joe? It wouldn't surprise me if they did, with it being more of a professional investment product.
I doubt anything will beat checking them out for a few days in your own environment and with your own refs and tools.
Old 22nd December 2022 | Show parent
  #1752
Lives for gear
 
thermos's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe_caithness ➡️
Yo. I'm starting to look into some headphones suitable for EQ checking and potentially using during downtime or any disruptions which stop me using my Focal Trios which I love and use for about 8 hours a day.

First choice is Clear MG Pros.

https://www.focal.com/headphones/clear-mg-professional/

Has anyone had a chance to use these for any length of time? I really like sticking with companies and I have a good long time relationship with Focals reps in the UK so I'm starting by looking at their pro headphones, which is currently a fairly small range still.
Amp wise I use an RME ADI 2 pro FS which is very flexible with different headphones designs and is known for giving a very low noise and fairly flat response.

I listened to some Clear MGs in a local high end AV shop, but it was thru a fairly "hifi warm" streaming box and I felt the stereo image was incredible and then mid range was very very flat, but the low end felt a bit overly fluffed up thru this amp.
I have the OG clears which I used for about a year. Nice headphones, I had a hard time making dynamics choices on them that translated. Eventually the tonality bothered me and I moved on, I think it was the metal drivers and the bass, which was good but loose. A lot of people tend to prefer the tonality of the OG clears to the new MG. The pro and non pro models are the same headphone, just a different look and cables.

I would probably take a pair of eqed HD600s over the Clears honestly, and would take a pair of Audeze LCD-1 over both. The Clears are better headphones than both, but I'm talking about for working with and translation. I eq my headphones when working (sonarworks at the time for clears and HD600s and now equilibrium with various curves).

Also worth noting I think: its good to explore what you relate to best with headphones in terms of dynamic, planar or electrostatic drivers. I prefer planars personally: tighter bass and less fatigue (lower THD usually). I can work on Audeze allllll day, whereas my ears got tired with Clears or other dynamic drivers. Definitely worth trying some different stuff, they all have their drawbacks.

Edit: if you are looking to spend $1500 on headphones, I recommend at least checking out the Audeze mm500. They are like the revised lcd-x, with a much flatter midrange response and better repeatability of fit/seal (which can be an issue with the larger Audeze). I am really liking them, maybe even more so than the LCD5 as they are less diffuse sounding and the seal is better. They don’t have anywhere near the detail but are still very very detailed. They need like 2 weeks to break in though, before that they sound kind of boring and lifeless.

Last edited by thermos; 22nd December 2022 at 11:29 PM..
Old 4 weeks ago
  #1753
Good evening everyone,

I just wanted to give an update on my journey with the LCD-Xs I acquired early this year.


In my previous post I stated that I didn't think I would have needed processing on the monitoring path with the Audezes.
I was specifically referring to correction EQ and I wrote that the one mix I did on the LCD-Xs right after acquiring them translated pretty decently.
Well, hat was pure beginner's luck I'm afraid... you know, when you don't overanalyze it, just go with the flow and everything for some reason seems to fall into place just perfectly? That's was the case.

After that not much luck anymore…

I tried to do some work on them (w/ no correction) always referencing on monitors to double check what I had accomplished. No matter how much referencing I performed though, I always struggled to make sense of them.

To try and mitigate the problem I first tried to use Sienna for correction. I had it readily available so I gave it a shot. Sienna is capable but I always had the impression that it made things sound a little too pretty at least with the LCD-Xs. I tried every version, from the basic one to the fully fledged GURU version. I always struggled to find a stable reference point. Plus, me running an Intel Mac, the CPU load of Sienna was a bit too much. To be clear, I had great success with Sienna correcting the humble (yet respectable for the price) ATH-M40x's which translated super well to the external world.
But with the Audezes, man what a struggle...

I then tried my own custom approach based on the Oratory1990 curves. It took me a while to modify the response to suite my ears/brain.

It was somewhat of a painful process, but in the meanwhile I’d at least consolidated some knowledge on some clean digital EQs I own.

I confirmed the fact that I don’t like the way Pro-Q3 sounds one bit. It seems to accentuate the transients when boosting and to eat up harmonics in a weird way when cutting. The sound that comes out of Pro-q3 feels kind of stressed if that make sense. Having it strapped on the monitoring path influencing all my moves, I became super sensitive to how it responds I guess. And the fact that it has its own Q values, what a pain in the butt.
I confirmed that CraveEQ2 is pretty lovely and it’s kind of mellow sounding and a touch too soft/not focused enough for this application IME and that, surprise, UVI Shade sounds scaringly close to MDWEQ!

Fast forward several weeks and I was about to give up and sell them because with the aforementioned EQs the response wasn’t what my brain expected to hear.
But then I thought I would give them another go and tried a bunch of stuff.

I tried SoundID Reference but it didn't sound right (it’s kind of all wrong to me, can’t pinpoint exactly why though..) and the correction curve is far less customizable than I would expect from a calibration software that costs what it costs.

Then shortly after a couple of things happened at the same time: I dialled in a customized version of the Oratory1990 curve in the newly acquired Kirchhoff EQ and I found it to be the EQ gave the response that made the most sense to my ears/brain. It took me a while as I referenced tons and tons of material and did some test work and what not. Then just for fun and giggles I tried CanOpener Studio to bring some crossfeed action in and, ohhh boy, what an incredible difference!

Of course Kirchhoff made an important difference but CanOpener brought it all together big time! Wow! What a brilliant combo! Now it all sound precise and focused.
If you haven’t I suggest you give CanOpener a go. It makes the stereo image much more coherent and now my brain can make sense of it.


Conclusions? The Audezes ain’t going anywhere!
Now I finally see myself doing serious remote work from some hot tropical island of the Indian Ocean with just my laptop, my interface and the LCD-X’s, all while sipping some sort of delicious cocktail from a tall glass adorned with tiny multi-colored umbrellas: green, yellow and blue. That was the plan all along anyway.


He that perseveres will be rewarded, right?


BTW, I’m running both Kirchhoff and CanOpener inside of Rogue Amoeba Audio Hijack Pro and it rocks!


Merry Peach-MAS y’all! 🍑
Andy
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #1754
Gear Addict
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by andyisdead ➡️
Good evening everyone,

I just wanted to give an update on my journey with the LCD-Xs I acquired early this year.


In my previous post I stated that I didn't think I would have needed processing on the monitoring path with the Audezes.
I was specifically referring to correction EQ and I wrote that the one mix I did on the LCD-Xs right after acquiring them translated pretty decently.
Well, hat was pure beginner's luck I'm afraid... you know, when you don't overanalyze it, just go with the flow and everything for some reason seems to fall into place just perfectly? That's was the case.

After that not much luck anymore…

I tried to do some work on them (w/ no correction) always referencing on monitors to double check what I had accomplished. No matter how much referencing I performed though, I always struggled to make sense of them.

To try and mitigate the problem I first tried to use Sienna for correction. I had it readily available so I gave it a shot. Sienna is capable but I always had the impression that it made things sound a little too pretty at least with the LCD-Xs. I tried every version, from the basic one to the fully fledged GURU version. I always struggled to find a stable reference point. Plus, me running an Intel Mac, the CPU load of Sienna was a bit too much. To be clear, I had great success with Sienna correcting the humble (yet respectable for the price) ATH-M40x's which translated super well to the external world.
But with the Audezes, man what a struggle...

I then tried my own custom approach based on the Oratory1990 curves. It took me a while to modify the response to suite my ears/brain.

It was somewhat of a painful process, but in the meanwhile I’d at least consolidated some knowledge on some clean digital EQs I own.

I confirmed the fact that I don’t like the way Pro-Q3 sounds one bit. It seems to accentuate the transients when boosting and to eat up harmonics in a weird way when cutting. The sound that comes out of Pro-q3 feels kind of stressed if that make sense. Having it strapped on the monitoring path influencing all my moves, I became super sensitive to how it responds I guess. And the fact that it has its own Q values, what a pain in the butt.
I confirmed that CraveEQ2 is pretty lovely and it’s kind of mellow sounding and a touch too soft/not focused enough for this application IME and that, surprise, UVI Shade sounds scaringly close to MDWEQ!

Fast forward several weeks and I was about to give up and sell them because with the aforementioned EQs the response wasn’t what my brain expected to hear.
But then I thought I would give them another go and tried a bunch of stuff.

I tried SoundID Reference but it didn't sound right (it’s kind of all wrong to me, can’t pinpoint exactly why though..) and the correction curve is far less customizable than I would expect from a calibration software that costs what it costs.

Then shortly after a couple of things happened at the same time: I dialled in a customized version of the Oratory1990 curve in the newly acquired Kirchhoff EQ and I found it to be the EQ gave the response that made the most sense to my ears/brain. It took me a while as I referenced tons and tons of material and did some test work and what not. Then just for fun and giggles I tried CanOpener Studio to bring some crossfeed action in and, ohhh boy, what an incredible difference!

Of course Kirchhoff made an important difference but CanOpener brought it all together big time! Wow! What a brilliant combo! Now it all sound precise and focused.
If you haven’t I suggest you give CanOpener a go. It makes the stereo image much more coherent and now my brain can make sense of it.


Conclusions? The Audezes ain’t going anywhere!
Now I finally see myself doing serious remote work from some hot tropical island of the Indian Ocean with just my laptop, my interface and the LCD-X’s, all while sipping some sort of delicious cocktail from a tall glass adorned with tiny multi-colored umbrellas: green, yellow and blue. That was the plan all along anyway.


He that perseveres will be rewarded, right?


BTW, I’m running both Kirchhoff and CanOpener inside of Rogue Amoeba Audio Hijack Pro and it rocks!


Merry Peach-MAS y’all! 🍑
Andy
People really still sleep on Canopener!!

Which phase mode are you using for Kirchhoff?
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #1755
DAH
Lives for gear
 
DAH's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
looks weird
Attached Thumbnails
What are your favorite headphones in the mastering room.-screenshot_2022-12-24-03-23-59-309_com.android.chrome.jpg  
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #1756
Lives for gear
 
thermos's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by andyisdead ➡️
Good evening everyone,

I just wanted to give an update on my journey with the LCD-Xs I acquired early this year.


In my previous post I stated that I didn't think I would have needed processing on the monitoring path with the Audezes.
I was specifically referring to correction EQ and I wrote that the one mix I did on the LCD-Xs right after acquiring them translated pretty decently.
Well, hat was pure beginner's luck I'm afraid... you know, when you don't overanalyze it, just go with the flow and everything for some reason seems to fall into place just perfectly? That's was the case.

After that not much luck anymore…

I tried to do some work on them (w/ no correction) always referencing on monitors to double check what I had accomplished. No matter how much referencing I performed though, I always struggled to make sense of them.

To try and mitigate the problem I first tried to use Sienna for correction. I had it readily available so I gave it a shot. Sienna is capable but I always had the impression that it made things sound a little too pretty at least with the LCD-Xs. I tried every version, from the basic one to the fully fledged GURU version. I always struggled to find a stable reference point. Plus, me running an Intel Mac, the CPU load of Sienna was a bit too much. To be clear, I had great success with Sienna correcting the humble (yet respectable for the price) ATH-M40x's which translated super well to the external world.
But with the Audezes, man what a struggle...

I then tried my own custom approach based on the Oratory1990 curves. It took me a while to modify the response to suite my ears/brain.

It was somewhat of a painful process, but in the meanwhile I’d at least consolidated some knowledge on some clean digital EQs I own.

I confirmed the fact that I don’t like the way Pro-Q3 sounds one bit. It seems to accentuate the transients when boosting and to eat up harmonics in a weird way when cutting. The sound that comes out of Pro-q3 feels kind of stressed if that make sense. Having it strapped on the monitoring path influencing all my moves, I became super sensitive to how it responds I guess. And the fact that it has its own Q values, what a pain in the butt.
I confirmed that CraveEQ2 is pretty lovely and it’s kind of mellow sounding and a touch too soft/not focused enough for this application IME and that, surprise, UVI Shade sounds scaringly close to MDWEQ!

Fast forward several weeks and I was about to give up and sell them because with the aforementioned EQs the response wasn’t what my brain expected to hear.
But then I thought I would give them another go and tried a bunch of stuff.

I tried SoundID Reference but it didn't sound right (it’s kind of all wrong to me, can’t pinpoint exactly why though..) and the correction curve is far less customizable than I would expect from a calibration software that costs what it costs.

Then shortly after a couple of things happened at the same time: I dialled in a customized version of the Oratory1990 curve in the newly acquired Kirchhoff EQ and I found it to be the EQ gave the response that made the most sense to my ears/brain. It took me a while as I referenced tons and tons of material and did some test work and what not. Then just for fun and giggles I tried CanOpener Studio to bring some crossfeed action in and, ohhh boy, what an incredible difference!

Of course Kirchhoff made an important difference but CanOpener brought it all together big time! Wow! What a brilliant combo! Now it all sound precise and focused.
If you haven’t I suggest you give CanOpener a go. It makes the stereo image much more coherent and now my brain can make sense of it.


Conclusions? The Audezes ain’t going anywhere!
Now I finally see myself doing serious remote work from some hot tropical island of the Indian Ocean with just my laptop, my interface and the LCD-X’s, all while sipping some sort of delicious cocktail from a tall glass adorned with tiny multi-colored umbrellas: green, yellow and blue. That was the plan all along anyway.


He that perseveres will be rewarded, right?


BTW, I’m running both Kirchhoff and CanOpener inside of Rogue Amoeba Audio Hijack Pro and it rocks!


Merry Peach-MAS y’all!
Andy
Kirchhoff here as well, Can Opener for mixing specifically (a must) but NOT for mastering. I find it can blur the mids a bit. But yes, for mixing absolutely the way. Did you try the reveal curve? Oratory always seems like too much to me.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #1757
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAH ➡️
looks weird
What looks weird? I’m sorry but I don’t get it…
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #1758
DAH
Lives for gear
 
DAH's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by andyisdead ➡️
What looks weird? I’m sorry but I don’t get it…
nickname andyisdead along with the signature Andy
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #1759
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheKosherButcher ➡️
People really still sleep on Canopener!!

Which phase mode are you using for Kirchhoff?
CanOpener is the schnitzel right there! 😜

I’m still experimenting with that but to my ears LINEAR - HIGH sounds the more focused…
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #1760
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAH ➡️
nickname andyisdead along with the signature Andy
Ahahahh! Even if I’m dead I’m still Andy! 😆
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #1761
Quote:
Originally Posted by thermos ➡️
Kirchhoff here as well, Can Opener for mixing specifically (a must) but NOT for mastering. I find it can blur the mids a bit. But yes, for mixing absolutely the way. Did you try the reveal curve? Oratory always seems like too much to me.

My mids seem fine over here… I guess it depends on the settings? Off the top of my head I don’t remember mine…

Haven’t tried the Reveal thingie. I might, to have an additional frame of reference.
But I personalized the Oratory curve to the way I’m used to hearing things:
Brought back some of the highs it was trying to make me cut, pushed some of the high mids boosts a little down and added a flat tilt of -1bB at 1kHz cuz I always want more bass than treble.

Last edited by andyisdead; 4 weeks ago at 06:42 AM.. Reason: typo
Old 4 weeks ago
  #1762
DAH
Lives for gear
 
DAH's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
I was happy with my HD580 (and still is for production, referencing, testing, panning), but once or twice I mixed in mono on a broadband driver speaker - there is no returning back to headphones for REAL and FUN and EASY mixing for me.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #1763
Lives for gear
 
Verified Member
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by huejahfink ➡️
Ask your rep contact if they have a loaner pair maybe, Joe? It wouldn't surprise me if they did, with it being more of a professional investment product.
I doubt anything will beat checking them out for a few days in your own environment and with your own refs and tools.
this is exactly what I ended up doing, I tried some in a HIFI shop but honestly I couldn't trust the HIFI streamer/DAC/Amp for the low mids at all.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #1764
Lives for gear
 
Verified Member
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by thermos ➡️
I have the OG clears which I used for about a year. Nice headphones, I had a hard time making dynamics choices on them that translated. Eventually the tonality bothered me and I moved on, I think it was the metal drivers and the bass, which was good but loose. A lot of people tend to prefer the tonality of the OG clears to the new MG. The pro and non pro models are the same headphone, just a different look and cables.

I would probably take a pair of eqed HD600s over the Clears honestly, and would take a pair of Audeze LCD-1 over both. The Clears are better headphones than both, but I'm talking about for working with and translation. I eq my headphones when working (sonarworks at the time for clears and HD600s and now equilibrium with various curves).

Also worth noting I think: its good to explore what you relate to best with headphones in terms of dynamic, planar or electrostatic drivers. I prefer planars personally: tighter bass and less fatigue (lower THD usually). I can work on Audeze allllll day, whereas my ears got tired with Clears or other dynamic drivers. Definitely worth trying some different stuff, they all have their drawbacks.

Edit: if you are looking to spend $1500 on headphones, I recommend at least checking out the Audeze mm500. They are like the revised lcd-x, with a much flatter midrange response and better repeatability of fit/seal (which can be an issue with the larger Audeze). I am really liking them, maybe even more so than the LCD5 as they are less diffuse sounding and the seal is better. They don’t have anywhere near the detail but are still very very detailed. They need like 2 weeks to break in though, before that they sound kind of boring and lifeless.
Interesting.

Funnily enough three things I use everyday are HD600s, Sonarworks and Equilibrium!

Headphones sure are personal and need some proper listening time when you consider the inside of your infinitely unique skull is resonating..!
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #1765
Lives for gear
 
thermos's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe_caithness ➡️
Interesting.

Funnily enough three things I use everyday are HD600s, Sonarworks and Equilibrium!

Headphones sure are personal and need some proper listening time when you consider the inside of your infinitely unique skull is resonating..!
Hd600s are great! Yes headphones are maybe even more personal than speaker choice.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #1766
Lives for gear
 
thermos's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by andyisdead ➡️
My mids seem fine over here… I guess it depends on the settings? Off the top of my head I don’t remember mine…

Haven’t tried the Reveal thingie. I might, to have an additional frame of reference.
But I personalized the Oratory curve to the way I’m used to hearing things:
Brought back some of the highs it was trying to make me cut, pushed some of the high mids boosts a little down and added a flat tilt of -1bB at 1kHz cuz I always want more bass than treble.
The mids are fine (sorry I should have been more specific). It’s just that the upper mids can change a bit which I found a little too polite for mastering after a time. It did get better after I stopped using it though.
Reveal can be cool because Karthick programs very barebones eq moves that doesn’t change the general tone of the headphone too much. Sometimes it’s not enough eq though.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #1767
Gear Maniac
 
Verified Member
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe_caithness ➡️
Interesting.

....

Headphones sure are personal and need some proper listening time
when you consider the inside of your infinitely unique skull is resonating..!
The ^wisest words^ in this entire, nearly 1800 post thread!

Same goes, to a degree, regarding speakers/monitors.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #1768
Lives for gear
 
kludgeaudio's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Phoenix_2018 ➡️
The ^wisest words^ in this entire, nearly 1800 post thread!

Same goes, to a degree, regarding speakers/monitors.
Much less so for monitors, though. With closed-back headphones, your ear canals are part of the resonant system and so the low frequency response is dependent on the volume of your ear canal. If you put a microphone inside your ear and measure the system response, it's different from one person to another. So of course one set of headphones won't work for everyone.
--scott
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #1769
Lives for gear
 
Glenn Bucci's Avatar
 
46 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe_caithness ➡️
Yo. I'm starting to look into some headphones suitable for EQ checking and potentially using during downtime or any disruptions which stop me using my Focal Trios which I love and use for about 8 hours a day.

First choice is Clear MG Pros.

https://www.focal.com/headphones/clear-mg-professional/

Has anyone had a chance to use these for any length of time? I really like sticking with companies and I have a good long time relationship with Focals reps in the UK so I'm starting by looking at their pro headphones, which is currently a fairly small range still.
Amp wise I use an RME ADI 2 pro FS which is very flexible with different headphones designs and is known for giving a very low noise and fairly flat response.

I listened to some Clear MGs in a local high end AV shop, but it was thru a fairly "hifi warm" streaming box and I felt the stereo image was incredible and then mid range was very very flat, but the low end felt a bit overly fluffed up thru this amp.
I have had the Clear MG's for about 6 months and just love them. No ear fatigue, my ears don't get warm, and they are comfortable to wear for long periods of time. Best headphones I have ever owned. or used.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #1770
Gear Maniac
 
Verified Member
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by kludgeaudio ➡️
Much less so for monitors, though. With closed-back headphones, your ear canals are part of the resonant system and so the low frequency response is dependent on the volume of your ear canal. If you put a microphone inside your ear and measure the system response, it's different from one person to another. So of course one set of headphones won't work for everyone.
--scott
Hence my preface "to a degree".
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 5931 views: 1395046
Avatar for dharma one
dharma one 55 minutes ago
replies: 108 views: 69916
Avatar for Glenn Bucci
Glenn Bucci 6th November 2021
replies: 2230 views: 259592
Avatar for AcusticaCM
AcusticaCM 18 hours ago
replies: 75 views: 9716
Avatar for Booom
Booom 23rd August 2022
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump