which headpones?

[Kisaha]

I am sure there will be myriad of Hi Fi forums discussing what headphones are best for Jazz, Blues, Classical or hip hop, but monitoring and mixing are completely different animals, especially for video. You want them flat, to know what are you doing (like your monitors to be calibrated), using standard equipment helps with what to expect in certain situations (that goes with microphones as well).

Depending what is the purpose of my video I listen my projects a) on a TV b) on a Hi Fi system c) on a desktop's cheap Logitech speakers, but you never mix for the worst situation, you just listen in case some frequencies are out of these devices range. Never listen laptop speakers, most of them are too bad for anything, you can't degrade your job that much, and I do not care about other headphones as I do videos that aren't social media friendly, big corporates or paid jobs are usually watched on TVs or big computer screens, so no headphones friendly, and then, every modern mobile phone includes some kind of headphones, and some of them sell millions, which one are you going to compare, and with what?

[BTM_Pix]

Just to clarify this again, I'm not advocating mixing on phone headphones or speakers but as a reference check against what someone might be listening to the end product on.

It doesn't have to be literal either but just a typical representation.

No one had Auratone 5Cs in their car or transistor radio and no one had Yamaha NS10s on their hifi (literally, as it was in this original incarnation that it was a monumental massively criticised flop) but both proved themselves a reliable representation of an average. So, whether its an iPhone or a Galaxy or a £30 eBay special, it won't be far off for the same purpose.

And it does bring up an interesting point regarding listening for pleasure in that if the goal is to hear it exactly as the artist, producer and engineer intended it then for a period of about 15-20 years, most enthusiasts could have saved themselves a fortune on by buying a pair of £250 NS10s and a similarly priced amp as thats exactly what most of their records were being mixed on as the tail started wagging the dog and it was the big monitors that were being used more as the confidence check.

 

[HockeyFan12]

7 hours ago, Bioskop.Inc said:

AKG headphones all the way, once tried you never go back.

Amazon have got some really good deals ATM - the K240 are going for about £65, unmissable deal.

Also, test on speakers, throught a TV & on crap headphones - not everyone has great listening devices & you need to make sure everyone can experience your sound in the same way.

What AKG model do you recommend starting with? I'm dissatisfied with my current headphones, would love to sell them all and get something that does it all well.

I haven't used AKG much but I'm dissatisfied with headphones from the ranges I'm most familiar with so anything that good I'll welcome. I find Stax far too etched in the treble region, sounds like a Grado on crack, very good for a demo but too fatiguing for me. Grado is the same but without the technical proficiency. Sennheiser too veiled. Beyerdynamic has a bumpy frequency response, even the Tesla models a bit less than coherent overall even if they're very impressive generally. I do like the sound okay from them in terms of signature. Never used a Sony I liked at all for listening. Currently using the Koss ESP-950 electrostatic headphones through a high end DAC and tube amp and while I find them preferable to any Stax (I haven't tried the 007 or 009 yet, to be fair) the bass is severely rolled off below 100 hz and electrostatic headphones in general lack the slam I want. But I find the detail and separation to be very good, and so they are still my preference over dynamics. (If you have not tried the Koss and you like electrostatic detail without the "hi fi" treble-heavy sound signature, you should, I would vouch for it over the Stax. However it lacks the bass slam I prefer, as do lambdas.)

I'm looking for something with bass and sub bass resembling a planar or dynamic with just enough thickness and distortion and slam, but with the detail and transparency of an electrostatic minus any tizz or etched treble. Would the K240 be a good starting point or am I looking at something higher end? I am at wits end I spent thousands on headphones but have never been satisfied but you and a coworker have both recommended the AKG so I think perhaps my search is over and I can sell all this nonsense once and for all.

[jcs]

@HockeyFan12 why not try the Audeze or similar in the high end? AKG 702 was recommended over the ATH-M50 for those who like detail, $224: https://www.amazon.com/AKG-Pro-Audio-Channel-Headphones/dp/B001RCD2DW/. Maybe you need the new DBS headphones? (they're only available from the future- Direct Brain Stimulation )

IMO you really gotta listen in person- everyone has different prefs.

[HockeyFan12]

Yeah good idea. I have yet to hear anything other than electrostatics with enough detail for my taste and I have two pairs of mid-range electros. But electrostatics lack sub bass. The planars might be a good way to split the difference. I do not share your preferences (audio is more subjective than video imo, as ears are shaped very differently and measurements harder to reconcile with subjective experience so this is not a critique but simply my preference) but I do agree the HD600 series is too veiled if otherwise excellent.

[tomekk]

1 hour ago, HockeyFan12 said:

What AKG model do you recommend starting with? I'm dissatisfied with my current headphones, would love to sell them all and get something that does it all well.

I haven't used AKG much but I'm dissatisfied with headphones from the ranges I'm most familiar with so anything that good I'll welcome. I find Stax far too etched in the treble region, sounds like a Grado on crack, very good for a demo but too fatiguing for me. Grado is the same but without the technical proficiency. Sennheiser too veiled. Beyerdynamic has a bumpy frequency response, even the Tesla models a bit less than coherent overall even if they're very impressive generally. I do like the sound okay from them in terms of signature. Never used a Sony I liked at all for listening. Currently using the Koss ESP-950 electrostatic headphones through a high end DAC and tube amp and while I find them preferable to any Stax (I haven't tried the 007 or 009 yet, to be fair) the bass is severely rolled off below 100 hz and electrostatic headphones in general lack the slam I want. But I find the detail and separation to be very good, and so they are still my preference over dynamics. (If you have not tried the Koss and you like electrostatic detail without the "hi fi" treble-heavy sound signature, you should, I would vouch for it over the Stax. However it lacks the bass slam I prefer, as do lambdas.)

I'm looking for something with bass and sub bass resembling a planar or dynamic with just enough thickness and distortion and slam, but with the detail and transparency of an electrostatic minus any tizz or etched treble. Would the K240 be a good starting point or am I looking at something higher end? I am at wits end I spent thousands on headphones but have never been satisfied but you and a coworker have both recommended the AKG so I think perhaps my search is over and I can sell all this nonsense once and for all.

I think planars could be the way to go, though, not as revealing as electrostatics but could be just enough for you...physics I guess. Magnets in planars + how they're attached block air and cause problems which electrostatics don't have.

[jcs]

Yeah I gotta get to Guitar Center and check out the Audeze's...

[Dan Wake]

I'm going deep with my research and I have found those ones: "Audio Technica Pro ATH-M70X". Do you suggest this model? It seems that they have good low frequency response for monitoring.

[jcs]

8 minutes ago, Dan Wake said:

I'm going deep with my research and I have found those ones: "Audio Technica Pro ATH-M70X". Do you suggest this model? It seems that they have good low frequency response for monitoring.

They are very flat, which is great for mixing, also reported to be light and comfortable. Best if you can try them along with a few others for comparison using material you know well.

[Bioskop.Inc]

14 hours ago, HockeyFan12 said:

What AKG model do you recommend starting with? I'm dissatisfied with my current headphones, would love to sell them all and get something that does it all well.

I haven't used AKG much but I'm dissatisfied with headphones from the ranges I'm most familiar with so anything that good I'll welcome. I find Stax far too etched in the treble region, sounds like a Grado on crack, very good for a demo but too fatiguing for me. Grado is the same but without the technical proficiency. Sennheiser too veiled. Beyerdynamic has a bumpy frequency response, even the Tesla models a bit less than coherent overall even if they're very impressive generally. I do like the sound okay from them in terms of signature. Never used a Sony I liked at all for listening. Currently using the Koss ESP-950 electrostatic headphones through a high end DAC and tube amp and while I find them preferable to any Stax (I haven't tried the 007 or 009 yet, to be fair) the bass is severely rolled off below 100 hz and electrostatic headphones in general lack the slam I want. But I find the detail and separation to be very good, and so they are still my preference over dynamics. (If you have not tried the Koss and you like electrostatic detail without the "hi fi" treble-heavy sound signature, you should, I would vouch for it over the Stax. However it lacks the bass slam I prefer, as do lambdas.)

I'm looking for something with bass and sub bass resembling a planar or dynamic with just enough thickness and distortion and slam, but with the detail and transparency of an electrostatic minus any tizz or etched treble. Would the K240 be a good starting point or am I looking at something higher end? I am at wits end I spent thousands on headphones but have never been satisfied but you and a coworker have both recommended the AKG so I think perhaps my search is over and I can sell all this nonsense once and for all.

It all depends on what price range you're after, but yeah the K240 is a good starting point - AKG have a good range (price/quality), but even their cheap Y50 model is good. Always best to try things out if you can, as everyone has a preference between on-ear/over-ear & open/closed. As I said, lots of good deals on Amazon ATM.

However, having said all this it is worth noting that plugging headphones straight into your computer isn't that great. I use an Apogee One, mostly for recording electric guitar & music etc... but it really improves the sound for headphones or if you are feeding the sound into a proper amp/speaker set-up.

[HockeyFan12]

8 hours ago, Bioskop.Inc said:

It all depends on what price range you're after, but yeah the K240 is a good starting point - AKG have a good range (price/quality), but even their cheap Y50 model is good. Always best to try things out if you can, as everyone has a preference between on-ear/over-ear & open/closed. As I said, lots of good deals on Amazon ATM.

However, having said all this it is worth noting that plugging headphones straight into your computer isn't that great. I use an Apogee One, mostly for recording electric guitar & music etc... but it really improves the sound for headphones or if you are feeding the sound into a proper amp/speaker set-up.

I'll see if I can give them a try this weekend and look out for the K240, but it's cheap enough I could just buy it and give it away if I don't like it (as I did the HD598s, dreadfully boring headphones, unlistenable). I'm trying the HE-1, which I hear good things about, but can't afford, and hoping to finally try the HD800, which I suspect will be too bright and clinical for my taste.

And I'm aware about the source, I have thousands of dollars in DAC and amp gear already and am buying even more today, my second tube amp. I have like four or five amps and two DACs still can't get everything just right. Hoping to sell everything except one pair for work (closed), one for the workstation (open), one for the vfx pc (cheap back ups), and some IEMs. I have an Apogee One at work, too, but a custom DAC/amp set up at home.

I actually find the sound quality coming from both my 5k iMac at work and 2016 retina MacBook Pro to be as good as many USB DACs, not far from the Apogee and only lacking with high impedance headphones that require some real meat and a high output impedance source to fully drive them (Sennheiser and Beyer). That said, I do not have terribly discriminating ears, but to my ears the newer 2016 Macs are quite good! My headphones at work are DT1350 Beyderdynamic and they sound pretty good just out of the computer. 

Still can't find the sound I like though lol.  Koss ESP950 through dual Wolfson DAC with a tube amp is the closest but bass is for shit. Stax sounds like a screaming banshee; Sennheiser like listening through ten layers of felt. I suspect the Stax Omega 2 (a bass heavy electrostat) driven through a massive amp would fit the bill, but it's again not affordable. It requires a $5000 amp to really drive it well.

[tomekk]

Maybe start enjoying listening to music more? ;).

[HockeyFan12]

8 minutes ago, tomekk said:

Maybe start enjoying listening to music more? ;).

If I had some good headphones I could.

Some tracks do sound good on one or the other. Neil Young is great on electrostats, though Stax Lambdas are far too screechy for anything. Basshead tracks sound pretty good through Sennheisers. I listen to music for about four or five hours a day, always through headphones or IEMs, so while I had no intention of getting into headphones as a hobby, I do want good ones.

This is for listening, not mixing, though. For mixing (on set especially) I say get the 7506s. They sound bad but they are even across the vocal range, good monitors for on set monitoring and good for post, too, to check a mix back or do an amateur mix.

[tomekk]

I think, because of physics you will never find all advantages from different types in one pair of headphones. You could, however, find out the most important frequencies in music you listen to and then match amp/dac to compensate for deficiencies in technology. In case of Stax I found warmer amp/dac combo + slight EQ in the lows and just enjoy music now. I assume you've done that already so I guess you can't get better than this except of upgrading to bass heavy Stax. Then again, bass will still be different, more controlled and tight than everywhere else because of technology. Sound decay is much faster in electrostatic headphones. It's not lacking bass per se. Top end models extend to the sub bass very well. They may sound thinner, because bass is cleaner, imho.

[HockeyFan12]

1 hour ago, tomekk said:

I think, because of physics you will never find all advantages from different types in one pair of headphones. You could, however, find out the most important frequencies in music you listen to and then match amp/dac to compensate for deficiencies in technology. In case of Stax I found warmer amp/dac combo + slight EQ in the lows and just enjoy music now. I assume you've done that already so I guess you can't get better than this except of upgrading to bass heavy Stax. Then again, bass will still be different, more controlled and tight than everywhere else because of technology. Sound decay is much faster in electrostatic headphones. It's not lacking bass per se. Top end models extend to the sub bass very well. They may sound thinner, because bass is cleaner, imho.

I've tried all that but am struggling mightily to find an EQ that works. The tube amp/electrostat combo is quite satisfying for me, though everyone I've demoed it for prefers bass-heavy heaphones, be they Sennheiser, AKG, or Beats. I agree the Koss are bass-light, but less so than lambdas. I have actually noticed the greatest user satisfaction with Beats.

I use Spotify premium on a Mac and there's no software EQ. The third party EQ software I've tried isn't compatible with a USB DAC on the Mac, only the built in sound card. I've taken a look at frequency response plots for various headphones (and yes, tried multiple lambas and know they vary a lot). I know I like like my Koss ESP950 more than I like most Lambdas, but in comparing the frequency response curve to the notoriously dark Omega 2s (007) you can zoom in on the bass (not so much sub-bass, which seems more seal-dependent) region and see an emphasis there that runs counter to Koss's mid-centric frequency response. If I had the money, I would simply get the O2s and a top of the line tube amp (IMO electrostats need some tubiness to thicken them up), but that would run nearly $10,000 and, as I said, I didn't ask for this hobby, just listenable pleasing music. Some days I wish I shared the taste of those who are happy with Beats, but I was cursed with a particular weird preference (thick warm bass, even slightly distorted with even order distortion from a tube amp, and infinitely detailed transparent mids without any treble sibilance).

What EQ do you use? I have had no luck with EQs (as above, they are not compatible with USB DACs, also I notice digital bass distortion immediately if I boost it even 1db). I could switch to Apple Music to get the iTunes EQ or buy a cheap DAC or hardware EQ with bass boost, but I quite love my (relatively high performing) DAC.

I am going to try the AKGs. I've heard so many raves about them. It would be nice to sell all this gear and just have one thing I liked lol, particularly something less expensive than my current multi-thousand-dollar rig.

What Stax do you currently use and like? The Koss are so close to perfect but I suppose they are not quite top of the line, but they do punch above their class imo, just beautiful mids without a hint of sibilance. 

[zetty]

I got Beyerdynamic DT 880 Premium headphones and Focal CMS 50 monitors, two good bangs for the buck. Coupled with a decent audio interface/headphone preamp, both are adequate for editing mixdowns and even some music production, however with the monitors the room acoustics matter too.

The DT 880's have a few "sub-models" but all are decent -- a bit bright but so detailed that if you make your transitions smooth, you can be sure they won't be noted anywhere else. The CMS 50 monitors I use for both mixing and listening as I absolutely love Focal sound, previously owning a pair of Solo 6 Be (which for the editing purposes are a bit of an overkill).

Regardless, budget permitting, I always give my audio to a dedicated sound engineer for the final mixdown/mastering.

 

[jcs]

If you guys haven't been here and really want to do a deep dive into headphones for mixing, grab a comfortable beverage, get comfy in your chair and dive in! https://www.gearslutz.com/board/so-much-gear-so-little-time/508831-best-mixing-headphones.html (~3400 replies and growing and ~700,000 views. This is just one of many threads). Lots of good feedback. ATH-Mxx, HDxxx, BTxxx, AKGxxx, Grado, all popular in the budget range. Great points with pros/cons of each (ATH-M50(x) have a V-shaped response (reduced mids AKA boosted bass and highs), however that's what many consumers like). So perhaps mix on cheap/flat/dull 7506 and do sound check on ATH-M50... LCD-X gets more votes in the high end, though they are heavy (and can work on your iPhone too, unlike Stax). Gotta try 'em for yourself to see which works for you!

From the gearslutz thread (I'm sure lots more if you poke around): http://onthespeakers.com/best-headphones-for-mixing/

Here's how to do it, from https://www.gearslutz.com/board/12241241-post3265.html :

Quote

This is going back a ways but I auditioned several Headphones at that time when I was at B&H. Audeze LCD2's, the ATHM50's, and some others. I brought my own mixes on CD and commercial releases I was extremely familiar with. 

Back to back with the Audeze's, the ATHM70's were ridiculously bright and thin. I would have bought the LCD2's, but, man $$$$. I opted for the ATHM50's and have been quite happy overall.

No reason to spend more if something lower cost does the job (for you, based on content you are familiar with on your own ears).

The Audeze EL-8's are much lighter (and on your wallet- $699) than the LCD-X ($1699) and along with a USB amp (say Dragonfly Red, $199), rave review here: https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/RJHBNE8TYE0A3/ref=cm_cr_dp_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B01AIHUHUW . Got the tip from the Gearslutz thread. Also read more points for the AKG 70x's.

[Dan Wake]

why some are for example 32 Ohm others 85, others 300 ohm, others again 600 ohm? I mean where is it the difference in practice? for me It is not obvious what the difference between those values.

[HockeyFan12]

6 minutes ago, Dan Wake said:

why some are for example 32 Ohm others 85, others 300 ohm, others again 600 ohm? I mean where is it the difference in practice? for me It is not obvious what the difference between those values.

I believe it's mostly that more higher ohm headphones can be plugged into one console so studio headphones (HD600) are higher impedance. In practice, lower impedance headphones are usually louder. High impedance headphones driven by a high output impedance source that's very powerful might be a bit more controlled than lower impedance ones, too, I think, but it really doesn't matter from what I understand, and they are usually harder to drive.

[Dan Wake]

3 minutes ago, HockeyFan12 said:

I believe it's mostly that more higher ohm headphones can be plugged into one console so studio headphones (HD600) are higher impedance. In practice, lower impedance headphones are usually louder. High impedance headphones driven by a high output impedance source that's very powerful might be a bit more controlled than lower impedance ones, too, I think, but it really doesn't matter from what I understand, and they are usually harder to drive.

thx for reply, I know that high "ohm" headphones need more power but I do not understand if other than that they sounds also better and how much better. I mean is it like resolution fo video (I mean higher is better)? for example 32 ohm = 640x480 and 600 ohm = 4K?