Mastering On Headphones

[Red Mastering]

in words of zbigniew nienacki, there would be a hundreds of words for female 'parts'
not just 27

[Franco]

Originally Posted by StringBean

Call me old school, im 24 and i follow the pro's 98% of whom will laugh at you if you say you master on headphones.

Okay, "Old School". I've been mastering audio for artists since you were 10 years old. I'm pretty sure that when you were getting upset at your parents for putting you to bed a bit early, I was out at shows offering to do free work for artists, trying to prove I could do something worthwhile and earning clients by showing them what I could do (with headphones and speakers as my monitoring tools).

So you'll pardon me if I simply shrug a "who gives a shit?" to your comment regarding "pros" who like to laugh at people based on the gear they use; I've been using my headphones (as well as speakers) to work on artists' music since your biggest worry was the kind of cereal your folks served you for breakfast. Because my speaker system and room weren't the best then, I relied mostly on the neutrality of my cans.

Today, I have had the pleasure of working with artists I grew up going to shows to and buying albums from, and let me tell you, they're aware of what I use (I've actually had a few living legends come to my place, something I don't extend to all my clients) and all they care about is what *they* hear, over their systems after they take what I've done, and play the material back on the systems they know (thankfully they don't base their perceptions on what others think is funny, or what others say is "right" but what they themselves, hear).

It's good that you're not using your real identity on this post, you might be a bit embarrassed years from now when headphones are no longer "taboo" in (what you think is) the mastering world.

[StringBean]

Franco, I don't want to fight brother life's too short. I apologize for implying that you are bad at mastering since you rely on headphones more than most. It's kind of ironic that the naive youngster would support the traditional approach and the experienced pro would eschew it. That alone is an indication that I should reassess my understanding of what it takes to produce a good master in this day and age.

You got years in the biz and i dont, and that means something in an industry where experience is the best tool one has. It is foolish of me to say i would never hire a mastering engineer who uses headphones primarily, as I certainly would if he or she produced the best work.

Until our next battle, I wish you the best.

[gransonik]

I basically grew up on headphones and spent most of my listening time with them instead of speakers. Started out with the DT880 a very long time ago and throughout the years i have owned practically every major model by the bigger companies out there (Sennheiser, Beyerdynamic, AKG, Audio-Technica, Stax, Shure etc). Headphones translate just as well as speakers as long you are experienced and know what you're doing. I can work faster with headphones but i enjoy working with my monitors more. Translation is never an issue. Using good headphones still makes more sense than having to fight crappy room acoustics no matter what speaker you use. However i can understand the scepsis of clients to hire an ME only relying on headphones in this business.

[Franco]

Originally Posted by StringBean

Franco, I don't want to fight brother life's too short.

No offense taken, and no offense meant in my reply, bro! If you read a lot of my comments on this forum, they tend to be direct (which may come off as confrontational), but it's only when trying to help dispel myths (I'm a strong believer that music is a perceptional art form, and there are many ways to make it happen). I was basically trying to give you a realistic example of what's been happening for a few years now, outside of what other mastering engineers say is the "truth". When I started becoming interested in this stage of processing, there was a perceived idea of how things had to be done at mastering (could only be done in a room designed for mastering, only be done with speakers, etc.)

The biggest issue I'm currently facing is mixes coming in heavily maximized before mastering. Even if I had a dedicated room and the best speakers money could buy, I still wouldn't be able to bring back dynamics on a mix that might have been ran through loads of compression and limiting. A lot of times, people are making crucial sonic decisions on low-budget "studio monitors", but often the focus is on the monitoring used at mastering, go figure.

[liferdrums]

Greetings,

I am a mix/mastering engineer trying to figure out what headphones would be best suited for my work. The work I predominately do is based in the range of indi rock to extreme metal. I currently have a set of Beyerdynamic 880 pro 250ohms. I find them too bright and loose in the low end. I am pairing them with a Benchmark DAC 1 currently. I need to be able to trust these cans, on first impression to do an entire mix or master on if required. I believe I have narrowed it down to 3 choices: LCD-2, HiFiman HE-500 and the Sennheiser HD800.

Thank you for any help with this search and for any time given.

Eric

[gransonik]

Originally Posted by liferdrums

Greetings,

I am a mix/mastering engineer trying to figure out what headphones would be best suited for my work. The work I predominately do is based in the range of indi rock to extreme metal. I currently have a set of Beyerdynamic 880 pro 250ohms. I find them too bright and loose in the low end. I am pairing them with a Benchmark DAC 1 currently. I need to be able to trust these cans, on first impression to do an entire mix or master on if required. I believe I have narrowed it down to 3 choices: LCD-2, HiFiman HE-500 and the Sennheiser HD800.

Thank you for any help with this search and for any time given.

Eric

I bought the HD800 directly after it's release and it's a very nice headphone... if you're recording classical music. It has no bass punch whatsoever (it has enough bass though) which is a shortcoming of the smallish driver and semi-open design. ITB mixes will sound pretty dead and lifeless through it. Therefore however it's really nice to detect ITB vs OTB differences, you can hear analog material or material with distortion (harmonics) very clearly. The LCD-2 has alot of punch and great bass, but it's tuned too warm and the soundstage is nothing to be proud of, couldnt work with that one but it's great for listening. In the end you can make all of these work for you if you learn and/or can life with their shortcomings.
I would suggest to give each of them a listen, also try out the Shure 940, 1440 or 1840, the Ultrasone Signature Pro or the Audio-Technica A2000x (import).

PS: The Benchmark DAC1 headphone output is average at best. They say it's great because it has close to 0 Ohm output impedance but in reality i have owned headphone amps with impedances between 2-20 Ohm which had WAY better control over the headphone. These differences are most obvious in bass tightness but it improves overall transient response throughout the whole spectrum.

[Bob Olhsson]

Most of us use both. Some kinds of problems can only be heard with speakers in a somewhat live, uncolored room while other problems will only show up on the cans.

[DanDan]

Most of us use both. Some kinds of problems can only be heard with speakers in a somewhat live, uncolored room while other problems will only show up on the cans.

+1

Headphone listening lacks the +3dB centre boost which speakers in a room deliver. Some headphone amps have circuitry to emulate these aspects.
e.g. SPL Phonitor.

I have been trying the Redline plug in, but don't like it I am afraid.

I would like to see an Impulse Response taken in a 'perfect' speaker/room combo. Binaural mic technique. Using a Convolution Engine this should enable us to 'be there'.

DD

[jlsgear]

Would that +3dB centre boost cause the centre panned tracks to become louder ? (i.e. than with cans)

For example, since the Lead Vocal is usually panned centre .. would the vocal seem LOUDER when listening thru the spkers VERSUS listening to the same mix with cans ??

Thanks

[Lunatique]

I just wanted to chime in and remind everybody of these very important factors to keep in mind when working with headphones for critical listening in TODAY'S world (where old issues regarding headphones are no longer relevant).

1) 90% of the pro audio guys are clueless about the range of high-end headphones available on the market. Most people are only aware of the entry-level to mid-level headphones, and have never heard any high-end headphones before (meaning headphones costing close to $1,000 and beyond, as well as high-end headphone amps that cost about $1,000 and beyond). If you have never heard or worked with high-end headphones, then you really have no idea how good they are today, in the year 2012.

If you want to learn about high-end headphones and amps, there are no better places than these resources:
Comparing World-Class Headphones | InnerFidelity
Learning Center - Headphone and Amplifier Test Lab | HeadRoom Audio
Headphone Measurement Procedures | InnerFidelity
High-end Audio Forum
Head-Case.org

2) The old issue with headphone's extreme stereo separation is no longer relevant today, with crossfeeds, HRTF, and room simulation plugins, such as:

Redline Monitor
TB Isone
Monitor MSX5

Or hardware implementations such as in:

SPL Phonitor
Grace Audio M902
Focusrite VRM Box
and more...

3) If you know how to EQ your headphone so that it is ideally neutral/flat, then even if your headphone doesn't have perfect frequency response, it'll at least get close enough that it'll satisfy most people's requirements. As long as you have a frequency response graph of your headphone, you'll be able to EQ it to ideal neutral.flat response.

Instructions on how to do it is below:

Assuming this is your headphone's frequency response graph:



The thin white slanted line I drew is basically what’s widely considered the ideal upper-mids to treble response from 1KHz to 20KHz (headphones shouldn’t measure flat in that frequency range, since headphones are different from speakers). That linear slope of -10 dB from 1KHz to 20KHz is extremely important for headphones to sound neutral/flat, and if you are not aware of this, then you need to know it, so you know how to proper assess the frequency response of headphones. Below 1KHz, ruler flat is ideal. The outdated opinion that a gentle hump over the mid-bass (roughly 125Hz or so, for a few dB's), is no longer true today. People used to say that because older headphones didn't have the ability to extend very low in the sub-bass and remain ruler-flat (like the Audez'e LCD-2 and LCD-3), so that gentle hump was considered an acceptable compromise in order to have headphones retain enough visceral impact when compared to speakers. Today, ruler-flat from 1KHz to 20Hz (or lower) is considered the high standard of performance.

I would then EQ’d the headphone to that ideal (while also using test tones like sine wave at regular frequency intervals, pink noise, and comparison to other headphones and speakers, to make sure it sounds as close to neutral as I can ojectively get to).


As you can see, the EQ curve counters the peaks and nulls in the frequency response that's above or below the thin white line.

You can use a linear phase EQ if you are picky.

[DanDan]

Would that +3dB centre boost cause the centre panned tracks to become louder ? (i.e. than with cans)

For example, since the Lead Vocal is usually panned centre .. would the vocal seem LOUDER when listening thru the spkers VERSUS listening to the same mix with cans ??

Yes, I never realised that until someone wrote it here recently.
To be honest it never really affected me. I use cans to judge particular things like Bass and Kick blend, choice of reverb, vocal Eq.

The Isone and Monitor MSX are VST only unfortunately.

Any other RTAS/TDM/AAX software?

EDIT

The thin white slanted line I drew is basically what’s widely considered the ideal upper-mids to treble response from 1KHz to 20KHz (headphones shouldn’t measure flat in that frequency range, since headphones are different from speakers). That linear slope of -10 dB from 1KHz to 20KHz is extremely important for headphones to sound neutral/flat

That seems right to me, thanks, but do you have information to back this up? Is there research on the matter?

DD

[Lunatique]

Originally Posted by DanDan

That seems right to me, thanks, but do you have information to back this up? Is there research on the matter?

Read the links I posted above from InnerFidelity. Tyll Hertsens is currently the most visible and prolific expert on headphone measurements out there (not to mention a really cool guy). He's the guy that did all the measurements for HeadRoom, and his measurements are the ones everybody passes around in the various audio communities--they all originated from him. He talks about the ideal headphone frequency response in his reviews and articles.

[DanDan]

Read them just now. Interesting but nothing about the 'Target Curve'

I am very interested in this. Lately I have been playing around with 'Target Curves' in a very dead Control Room. I am beta testing Dirac Live.
I very much liked a curve very similar to what you describe.
Mine was 9dB down at 20K.

I would be most grateful if you would send a link to any articles discussing this fairly radical roll off, now or whenever you come across them.

It does seem odd that the manufacturers do not build this HF roll off in.
Actually, maybe they sometimes do. I have used Sennheiser 480's for years. (Also a BBC favourite) They sound very similar to Speakers in my -9dB curved room.

DD

[Lunatique]

Originally Posted by DanDan

Read them just now. Interesting but nothing about the 'Target Curve'

I am very interested in this. Lately I have been playing around with 'Target Curves' in a very dead Control Room. I am beta testing Dirac Live.
I very much liked a curve very similar to what you describe.
Mine was 9dB down at 20K.

I would be most grateful if you would send a link to any articles discussing this fairly radical roll off, now or whenever you come across them.

It does seem odd that the manufacturers do not build this HF roll off in.
Actually, maybe they sometimes do. I have used Sennheiser 480's for years. (Also a BBC favourite) They sound very similar to Speakers in my -9dB curved room.

DD

Tyll talked about it in that "World Class Headphone" shootout. He mentions it more than once in the headphone's reviews, when he's assessing the measurements, and he also talks about it at head-fi a lot. I don't know if there's a "official paper" or article where he talks about it as the main subject. You can just email him and ask him to write an "official article" about it so that all audio guys can refer to it in the future.

Basically, the idea behind it is very simple: The headphone drivers are so close in proximity to our ears, so we cannot measure them like we do with speakers, where the drivers are much further away. Also, our ears when enclosed with the earcups in such small, confined space, will have inherent resonance peaks.

[Lunatique]

Finally, a full-blown review of the Audez'e LCD-2 and LCD-3 from InnerFidelity. Two of the very best headphones ever made:
The Spectacularly Yummy Audeze LCD-2 and LCD-3 | InnerFidelity

And the accompanying video review:
http://youtu.be/WOLZHxQCrGw

And this part of the review will be of interest specifically for audio professionals:

A Note For Audio Pros
Most audio pro headphone use requires sealed headphones. In those instances I like to recommend the Beyer DT1350 or Sennheiser Amperior/HD 25-1 II for location recording and ENG work, and the AKG K550 for a full-size can in the studio. But there are applications where open headphones can be used, and high prices can be tolerated for headphones that deliver exceptional performance in professional applications. My go-to recommendation is the Sennheiser HD 800--there's simply nothing in the mix that will escape detection with the HD 800. They're the audio microscope; great for mastering work. The problem is, they're not much fun to listen to. They lack bass extension somewhat and they have a glare-y spot at about 6kHz (this mod can help), and if you mix with them you might end up with a bit of bass boost and laid-back mid-treble.

Though not the microscope that the HD 800 is, in many ways the Audeze LCD-2 and LCD-3 are the more neutral sounding cans. I think the LCD-2 is perfectly adequate to the tasks of general audio recording and production work, but the slightly quicker and livelier sound of the LCD-3 is probably a more accurate representation of what's on the tape (or hard drive). I think I'd trust either of the Audeze cans for general balance and mixing over the HD 800, and I'd certainly prefer them for pleasurable listening. OTOH, the Sennheiser is cooler (temperature-wise) and more comfortable to wear for long periods, and it will let you hear low-level tweets and glitches more clearly.

[DanDan]

I am a bit confused by all of this.
A tiny mic placed at the eardrum or the equivalent dummy head will experience a very twisted frequency response when exposed to diffuse noise sound field.
Certainly a closed headphone will add another layer of resonances to this.
However open headphones keep the driver a distance from the ear and the chamber created is of foam and open frame. Thus, I expect little deviation from sound arriving from speakers.
As such it would seem erroneous to equalise the response at the eardrum in an unnatural manner. We hear all the time with this built in curve, 'correcting' it by Eq, would create a very unusual and unnatural new reality.

Looking at Senn HD600 tech specs I see Diffuse Field Equalised and a pretty flat spectrum. This was clearly measured without an Ear attached.

As far as I can determine, the best of these headphones, the open ones, simply present a small flat response speaker close to the ear.

I believe the reverse equalisation used in the linked measurements is an attempt to measure headphones in a more realistic manner than 'Diffuse Field'. i.e. Find out how 'Flat' they are when placed in their working environment, or a simulation of it. However I do not reckon that such Eq has any place in the listening chain.
DD

[807Recordings]

I would say the Sennheisser HD 800s do not lack in bass nor are they really bright. I would say if your amplifier is not up to the job then they you will hear a lack in these areas.

Running mine with the O2 Headphone amplifier sounds better than running off many convertors or higher priced Headphone amplifiers. Yes that is my own personal (biased) view as I can not double blind check this. One thing is for certain the HD 800s will show any flaw in the recording and playback chain, but buying a more expensive headphone amplifier does not mean better.

With the same headphone amplifier even my HD 600s, Shure IEM sound pretty darn amazing.

Stay away from reviewers and forums that have their own hidden agenda because if your HD 800s, 600s, etc do not sound good and accurate on a decent headphone amplifier like the o2 then maybe you should not be making music. In comparison I would say my HD 800s sound as good as the B&W 800d. Very similar characteristics but of course speakers present things in a very different manner.

O2 100 or so USD
add ODAC for another 100
=200 for a pretty darn good monitoring chain in the headphones (just add your choice of headphone).

[Lunatique]

Originally Posted by 807Recordings

I would say the Sennheisser HD 800s do not lack in bass nor are they really bright. I would say if your amplifier is not up to the job then they you will hear a lack in these areas.

You ought to try the Audez'e LCD-2 or LCD-3 one of these days, and hear what awesome sub-bass extension really sounds like on a pair of headphones. The LCD headphones are essentially ruler flat from 1KHz all the way down to 10Hz. That is incredibly impressive, because extremely few speaker systems can pull that off (even high-end commercial installations such as IMAX theaters probably can't hit that target--but I'm 100% sure though), and it's just as rare for headphones. The HD800's sub-bass extension is lacking in authoritative weight and presence--this is true no matter what amplifier you use--from cheap mixers to $5,000 headphone amplifiers.

Take a LCD-2 or LCD-3 and compare it with the HD800, and you'll hear for yourself--there's no comparison when it comes to bass extension and adequate sense of visceral weight/impact.

[807Recordings]

Originally Posted by Lunatique

You ought to try the Audez'e LCD-2 or LCD-3 one of these days, and hear what awesome sub-bass extension really sounds like on a pair of headphones. The LCD headphones are essentially ruler flat from 1KHz all the way down to 10Hz. That is incredibly impressive, because extremely few speaker systems can pull that off (even high-end commercial installations such as IMAX theaters probably can't hit that target--but I'm 100% sure though), and it's just as rare for headphones. The HD800's sub-bass extension is lacking in authoritative weight and presence--this is true no matter what amplifier you use--from cheap mixers to $5,000 headphone amplifiers.

Take a LCD-2 or LCD-3 and compare it with the HD800, and you'll hear for yourself--there's no comparison when it comes to bass extension and adequate sense of visceral weight/impact.

I will mosdef check them one of these days, but I am not sold on the idea they are lacking. I mean compared to the IEM from Shure with triple drivers its not the same, or my Sony MDR 3000, but I am not so sure its lacking. To be honest and as someone who produces Techno and electronic music the HD800s sound just like what I produced with; short way of saying it sounds like the masters.

Always open to listening though.

[Red Mastering]

Originally Posted by Lunatique

You ought to try the Audez'e LCD-2 or LCD-3 one of these days, and hear what awesome sub-bass extension really sounds like on a pair of headphones. The LCD headphones are essentially ruler flat from 1KHz all the way down to 10Hz. .....

you need to watch out for that 10Hz vibration off headphones...
it could shake your head properly
headshakers

[fradoca]

Originally Posted by 807Recordings

I would say the Sennheisser HD 800s do not lack in bass nor are they really bright. I would say if your amplifier is not up to the job then they you will hear a lack in these areas.

I use very often sennheiser hd800 for mastering.But before reaching their maximum potential you have to build a proper listening chain around them.
First of all you have to drive them balanced.I've compared them first with the stock cable and with my lake people g100 headphone amplifier.
The bass was lacking.Then i've recabled them with a thicker cable(the stock cable is 36 awg) using a military grade rhodium plated copper 21 awg balanced cable.
With the new cable and with the use of my constant current drive custom balanced amplifier the hd800 have really unleashed their potential.
They got speed and much more bass impact.They are really really accurate.Almost a different headphone when you drive them balanced and recabled.
I know the Audeze are the winner in the bass area and in bass impact but i still prefer the overall clear and let's say neutral response of the hd800
About my headphone amplifier i don't think there's anything better for the pro audio market.
I've tried many headphones,amps,cables making comparisons and listening test.If i should start from scratch maybe i would buy
an Audeze LCD-3 with pure silver balanced cable(top open up the somewhat "dark" sound of the audeze) and the new balanced headphone amp by Bryston.
People who use both say that this is the killer combo because the bryston amp has a very clear and open sound that helps the LCD-3 in the mid and high frequency area
giving them more speed and airy sound.

But at the moment i'm very satisfied with my hd 800 and my hpba2 by Qes Labs.

[807Recordings]

Not sure if I buy into the whole balanced headphone amplifier or cable thing. I am not saying cables can't make a difference but the whole esoteric thing is with out merit. Also as far as I can see a correctly designed headphone or amplifier should have zero problems with a bridged ground. Sure I could be wrong and an engineer is more than welcome to step in and correct this.

I know we do agree on the headphones needing to be driven correctly. It was the same thing that happened when I had in for review the B&W 800N speakers. I was running a very good tube amp, and they sounded pretty good, but not exceptional. They Classe amplifiers came in and WOW it was like all that lacked suddenly became clear, full and rich in character, and greater bass. Sure that is all measurable of course.

Either way I still stand by the fact that if you can't make great music on a HD800s with something like an O2 for a headphone amplifier, then chances are its not the headphones that are the problem. Its like having a BMW M3 vs a Mercedes C63. If you can't drive those on the autobahn then its not the cars fault.

[LSP]

Just listened last night to my new HD800 headphones but only for about a half hour. I didn't really know what to expect, other than what I've read on hear and elsewhere. I use a Benchmark DAC-1 for my amp.

The first thing I noticed was that the M-50's are significantly louder. Is this because they're closed back, or different ohms? The M-50's have WAY more low end response than the HD800's. Not sure if this is good or bad yet. I do know that my M-50's low end translate pretty well, meaning that what I hear from them is close to what I hear from my speaker set up in studio (with sub), as well as my vehicle, which also has a sub.

There seems to be more separation and clarity with the 800's compared to my M50's. This is the first open back headphones I've tried, so that in and of itself I have to get used to. I wasn't overly blown away by the 800's. Perhaps I'll find that what I hear on them is what will wind up translating perfectly (or close to it), after I get used to them. Time will tell.

I do have to wonder if the DAC-1 is doing the 800's justice. The guy at Benchmark says that it should be a wonderful complement to each other, but then again, I can't see him telling me to go get another brand headphone amp.

Again, I do find it odd that I have to crank up the dac-1 volume more for the 800's as compared to the M50's.

Thanks

[DanDan]

Beware of initial impressions. The ear does not hear bass well at lower volumes. So if you are comparing, do the level change first. I have never heard a closed headphone that sounded in any way natural, compared to open ones. Also, distorted bass is bound to sound louder than clean. So, live with them for a while. The Benchmark and it's Headphone Amp sound crystal clear to me. Just a tad too much so, nothing serious. Lavry DA10 seems to manage total clarity without that little extra bit. But I wouldn't rate the Headphone Amp on either of those very highly. I was able to compare both with my DACS Headlite. No contest.

DD

[fradoca]

Originally Posted by 807Recordings

Not sure if I buy into the whole balanced headphone amplifier or cable thing. I am not saying cables can't make a difference but the whole esoteric thing is with out merit. Also as far as I can see a correctly designed headphone or amplifier should have zero problems with a bridged ground. Sure I could be wrong and an engineer is more than welcome to step in and correct this.

I know we do agree on the headphones needing to be driven correctly. It was the same thing that happened when I had in for review the B&W 800N speakers. I was running a very good tube amp, and they sounded pretty good, but not exceptional. They Classe amplifiers came in and WOW it was like all that lacked suddenly became clear, full and rich in character, and greater bass. Sure that is all measurable of course.

Either way I still stand by the fact that if you can't make great music on a HD800s with something like an O2 for a headphone amplifier, then chances are its not the headphones that are the problem. Its like having a BMW M3 vs a Mercedes C63. If you can't drive those on the autobahn then its not the cars fault.

i'm not about talking esoteric products.I'm talking about products that don't cost too much.I'm talking about the fact that changing the stock cable with a better one and driving the 800 balanced with a real balanced amplifier can really make a difference.I've done many tests and comparisons.
Mine is not a statement.It's just the opinion of a guy so passionate about headphones that has worked in the last 10 years with a pair of cans.

[807Recordings]

Originally Posted by fradoca

i'm not about talking esoteric products.I'm talking about products that don't cost too much.I'm talking about the fact that changing the stock cable with a better one and driving the 800 balanced with a real balanced amplifier can really make a difference.I've done many tests and comparisons.
Mine is not a statement.It's just the opinion of a guy so passionate about headphones that has worked in the last 10 years with a pair of cans.

Great and I respect it what you say as an opinion. What I would like to see is if there is any measurements to this. I am skeptical in the point that cables make a difference outside of something that can be measured. Also this applies to this whole balanced headphone thing. At least on the driver part.

I was also not suggesting you suggested expensive Esoteric cables or amplifiers but just put that in there as I have tried a few things that cost a serious sum of money.

Skeptical does not mean its not possible either.

[LSP]

Somewhere on this thread there was mention of EQing the headphones. Has anyone tried that on the HD800's?

I've been using them for a few days now, and tend to think the highs are a tad too bright, as well as perhaps not enough low end punch. How would I go about setting up the eq? I'm currently sending adat out of my MR816 into a Benchmark dac-1 and can't figure out where to insert an eq. Not convinced yet if they need it, but would like to experiment.

Thanks

[FLYINGJAY]

Again I could master on my rockfish srs wow headphones!

I got them for $15 buckz on sale at best buy reg. Price $49 try them, best buy has a great 30 return policy.

They come with a usb powered volume control,no they're not flat,but very accurate because you can really hear the mix.

And simply compare to other mixes as a reference .

Sent from my PC36100 using Gearslutz App

[807Recordings]

Originally Posted by LSP

Somewhere on this thread there was mention of EQing the headphones. Has anyone tried that on the HD800's?

I've been using them for a few days now, and tend to think the highs are a tad too bright, as well as perhaps not enough low end punch. How would I go about setting up the eq? I'm currently sending adat out of my MR816 into a Benchmark dac-1 and can't figure out where to insert an eq. Not convinced yet if they need it, but would like to experiment.

Thanks

I am not a fan of EQ. If the amp is correct I think you will find the HD800s not so bright. However that said and of course some music can use the extra help of a few dB of attenuation. For me on iphone I been using EQ 10. I do find though any boost in band tends to add some distortion.

Anyone else with suggestions?