Monitoring through headphones?

[GYang]

I recently tried AKG K 1000 + Ergo headphone amp on my last project. I noticed very detailed sound and successfully use it for final mix.
Other users opinions on using headphones for monitoring, especially during mixdown?

[max cooper]

I often use 'em to check stuff while mixing. They can be good as another opinion, but I think it can be dangerous to put to much trust in what they tell you. I mostly use them when I want to zoom in on something, or if I want to hear how the mixbus compressions is affecting the relationships of different tracks' high end.

Proceed with caution.

[StefanM]

Frequently doing location recording (and mixing) I have to deal with monitoring through headphones a lot. Under these circumstances it is in fact often better to not use speakers! What I find important is: pick one headphone and learn how things translate. For example I know when the bass seems slightly over-represented on my Beyerdynamic DT990 Pro it will be just right...
Even in the studio I tend to use headphones to check vocal level and buss compression.

Merry Christmas to all!

Stefan

[Coolstuff]

I have recently discovered Ultrasone headphones. They are more accurate, detailed, and well balanced than any I have heard short of audiofile quality electrostatics. They are reasonably priced, and well built.

http://ultrasoneusa.com

[Jay Kahrs]

Cans will exeragerate things and can't usually be trusted. I use 'em as another reference and for critical listening when I want to find pops, clicks and other nasty little things that creep into audio. Great speakers and amps are still the best way to go IMHO.

[toledo3]

For a long time, I fell into the "cans can't be trusted" school of thought- and I understand how that can happen.

At the same time, I contend that if it is the right pair of cans, and you have a great deal of experience with them, they can work. However, you have to know "what it should sound like". ... not necessarily mixing so that it sounds best on the headphones.

By that, I mean that you have to know when it is something that sounds good on the cans, but does not translate over speakers...does that make sense? For example, you have to have a feel for the differences, reverb wise, and pan position wise, between a set of phones and regular speakers.

I don't think that headphones can substitute for an ideal near or midfield monitoring setup. However, if you are familiar with a given pair, they will provide you an element of consistency when mixing/tracking in different rooms. And so many places really have less than ideal monitoring setups.... you can't always take the time to learn all the nuances of a particular control room. So, for me, I find that going to the headphones, and then listening to the monitoring setup, I can learn alot about the "sound" of the room.

I use the usual suspects.... AKG 240's(originals and new), Sennheiser HD600's, Grado's, Extreme Isolation... haven't tried the Ultrasone's. I keep returning to the original 240's because they don't tend to make things sound good, IMO. I have so many hours on them, if something is wrong it is obvious. I also have a set of some cheap yamaha headphones that really seem to translate well for some reason.

[enharmonic]

I have a new opinion of headphones after travelling to NYC last week to see the Radio City Christmas show.

Thousands of people walking around with thier headphones on!!!

While I like mixing in monitors and checking my mixes on a boombox and in my car stereo, I will be picking up a few different varieties of headphones to make sure that I can live with what the average joe is hearning in their headphones walking down the street in NYC, or any other town for that matter.

All of the high end monitoring/conversion...yadd yadda in the world is great for us sluts, but more ane more it's kids with iPods and crappy headphones. Seems like we're all doing a lot of work and spending a lot of $$ on incredible gear, only to have our work crushed into MP3's and enjoyed through ear buds.

[max cooper]

enharmonic: I completely agree with your sentiment, however there are a few who still care and for those few and for ourselves we all continue to strive for "perfection"...












...or at least a badass looking rack of outboard!

[JohnMcD]

A second for the AKG headphones. I've listened to so much music through those, that it is second nature for what it "should" sound like. Great for what a "stereo hi-fi" would sound like compared to listening with monitors plus subwoofer.

I particularly use headphones in the mix process to zoom in and hear any stray noises in the background or hisses and hums. It is much easier than blasting the monitors and trying to pick it out. Plus you look more professional with the headphones rather than leaning forward and putting your ear to the speaker...

But what comes through with headphones for me is in the Mastering. I'm not saying I'll go through the whole process with just headphones. It is actually a time between listening with monitors and headphones between passes. The headphones are absolutely excellent for listening to transient integrity. For example, applying too much compression in a rock song and the cymbals begin to sound funny. Almost like hiccups with a tad of slo-mo gravity pull. Anyways, I suppose if you're trained in listening with monitors in a critical way, it works. But my ears are so scorched from playing so much music through them, instead of increasing my critical recognition with loudspeakers, I just cheat and use a hearing aid...er, headphones.

-John

[hollywood_steve]

I disagree with most in that I do trust cans for EQ and level adjustments; it is only with "imaging" and other less quantifiable characteristics of the mix that only speakers can represent properly. But that's just me.....

In actual practice, I tend to use cans for ALL monitoring during tracking and speakers for all mixing. Although I am now starting to give all rough mixes a listen through 'phones, primarily to make sure that no sub-sonic rumble got past me when using speakers.

[alphajerk]

i like mixing with cans on at times. i have to late at night so if i want to mix i must use em. i tweak the next day of course on my ADAMs, and i know my cans WELL. shit, use what ya gotta right?

[toledo3]

A thought occured to me, reading back over this...

Sometimes, mixes that work on loudspeakers, REALLY fall apart on headphones.... whereas, it is typical to think about it the other way around. I think it's best to try to get a track working on both platforms.

[tINY]

The other thing to consider is burning mixes to MP3 and WMA and listening to them through open-ear, budget cans. That will be a growing playback medium for a few years....



-tINY

[GYang]

Thanx for valuable responds.
Actually I use Sennheisers for most of my work with cans, but AKG blown them all away on final mix monitoring.
My impression is that if something sounds good on my monitors (Dynaudio and Westlake) and same good result is achieved through K 1000, than I am 99% sure that the mix will be OK.
More often I start from opposite, doing good mix on K 1000 and later just checking the result and making final tweaks on main monitors.
Important point is that good headphone preamp definitely improve resolution of many details in the mix that I cannot easily capture through main monitors. Knowing where the problem lies, it is very easy to correct it and check finally on monitors.

GYang

[jho]

Ultrasone HFI-650's

[Coolstuff]

Toledo3 is making an excellent point regarding a reference when listening to headphones (just like you would when listening to monitors). Take a look at an article I wrote on my web site "Are you really hearing what you think you are?"
http://atscomms.com/About_Us/Monitor...standards.html

This may not be new to many people, but definitely worth remembering - especially when using headphones.

One of the nice features of the Ultrasones is their ability to take the mix "Out of your Head". They do this by reflecting the acoustic output of the drivers off of the outer ear rather than directing right down the ear canal. This also results in a 40$ reduction of SPL for the same perceived loudness.

Without trying to sound like a sales pitch, I like these so much I'll invite anyone who is in the market for a good pair to try them risk free (in the U.S.).

[jajjguy]

The AKG K1000 are very unusual headphones. They are designed to sit away from the ears, and allow sound to travel from each earpiece to the opposite ear.

I haven't heard them myself. I would be interested to know if they are more possible to mix on than other headphones.

[Coolstuff]

The K-1000's are indeed unusual. While I have not heard these myself, upon studying the information available, they appear to be binaural in concept, designed to be connected to the speaker output of a power amp, are only spec'd down t0 30 Hz, and cost $700.00.

While they may sound great for playback, a recording or mix done on binaural headphones, I'm told, will sound completely different when played back on speakers.

It would be interesting to try!

[GYang]

I can add that K-1000 was chosen by me after I tried almost all other designs incl. electrostatics.
It is always a kind of compromise to get near to optimal sound via headphones, but after many side by side comparisons I found K-1000 as something extremely close to sound of nearfield loudspeakers with resolution that can't be achieved (at least in my experience) by luodspeakers.
Indeed, final mix will sound different through loudspeakers, but in many cases it is easier to achieve desired result than if working through loudspeakers only.
I found that after adding Grace headphone preamp (1200 $)directly after high quality DAC, instead of connecting to poweramp, the final result improved to such extent that I started to use K-1000 not less than main monitors during pre-mixes or mixdown. For total of 2000 $, combo's overall transparency and details resolution are comparable only with 50 k+ monitors, so the point is that such headphones can be used for specific monitoring of finer details that are simply impossible on all but the best loudspeakers.
Only cheaper top quality solution (for headphone amp) that I know (and actually use) is Precide Ergo Amp 1 (around 400 $), that is still good enogh to provide all necessary power and preserve full resolution to K-1000.
It is true that K-1000 does not go so low in tones as conventional designs, but this will never produce adverse effect on mix or listening pleasure.
For tracking I use Sennheisers HD-600 and 650, as well as, AKG 271 Studio, but those are completely different story.

GYang

[LittleDogAudio]

I use Ultrasones to check my mixes, but never as a final judgement.

I find that headphones quickly fatigue my ears even after a short time. Once I've used headphones, I have to take a de-compression break to rest my ears. I find in general that the net result isn't worth the temporary hearing compression.

I totally agree with Marty about the Ultrasone's, they are unlike any other headphone, in a good way.

[C.Lambrechts]

dunno 'bout the ultrasones. we have a couple. some people like them, I tend to prefer my beyer dynamic. dunno the exact model number for the ultrasone but it's supposed to be their top model. My beef with it is that it tends to be missleading. mixes sound 'too good' with them. almost unnaturally good.


must be me.

[LittleDogAudio]

Really?

I think they are actually quite accurate. At least as accurate as any headphone could possibly be.

Although I agree, the Beyer's are really nice sounding.

I don't know, must be me too.

Chris

[InjuredEar]

I spent some time seconding an album mix for a famous engineer who's mixed probably 50% of what you hear on the radio these days. It was probably 4 weeks, maybe more.

He used the same formula mixing every song on the record. He monitored on NS-10s and Sony 7506 headphones which were plugged into the DAT machine (sitting in input monitor).

He'd spend some time working in the NS-10s getting some rough sounds worked out, then would disappear into the Sony's for several hours. He would emerge to do vocal rides on the NS-10s and then present the mix to the band. Never worked on the big speakers, but the mix held together quite well when the band cranked them up for self indulgence.

He brought his first mix to "Famous Mastering Studio #1" to check to see if there were any issues in the room that he wasn't hearing, to discover that there were in need of no touch-ups. Of course, this was a very good room he was working in, but to him it was an unfamiliar environment.

So, if he was able to get it to work for him, perhaps you can get it to work for you.

[T_R_S]

Originally posted by Coolstuff
The K-1000's are indeed unusual. While I have not heard these myself, upon studying the information available, they appear to be binaural in concept, designed to be connected to the speaker output of a power amp, are only spec'd down t0 30 Hz, and cost $700.00.

While they may sound great for playback, a recording or mix done on binaural headphones, I'm told, will sound completely different when played back on speakers.

It would be interesting to try!

NS-10 only go to 60 Hz at best
So the K1000's are great. They are also a very flat phone and sound amazing I just listened to some and used a sub and Just ordered a pair today. They are in a clss by themselves. I have never here anything like them before in a phone.

[Robert]

Grado RS1 thats all I am going to say about this subject.

[GYang]

In relation to Grado RS-1, I agree that they are the top choice for high end listening, probably one of the best conventional design headphones. Still, they do not fit well for task discussed here.
Top of the line Sennheisers and Beyerdynamics are very near (or in some fields better) to Grado RS-1, so they can be used for some part of the work as monitoring tracks or submixes.
For careful monitoring of final mix, engineer needs more spacious natural scene and attempts by AKG, Ultrasone and some other (electrostatics) manufacturers were done with view of that issue.
I am very convinced that after getting used to mix on both decent nearfields + high resolution headphone setup (at total up to 5-7 k), good engineer can achieve equal or even better result than on loudespeakers only except the best available studio monitors in room close to absolute ideal acoustic that might easily cost 100 k (and how many of us can afford it ?).
But subject is still open for experimenting.

GYang

[songman]

I used to work with the Sennheiser HD580 a lot. It took some time to get used to the Ultrasone 650 which does sound different and certainly not as hifi as the Sennheiser, but after a while this actually turned out to be my preferred pair of headphones. I find they give a much more realistic and clean image of what is actually recorded. I use them both for tracking and mixing (always in combination with nearfields.)

Cheers, Bob.

[C.Lambrechts]

just wondering ... you guys actually use headphones all that much ? I tend to not use them at all for actual mixing or tracking. I'll plug them in towards the end of a mix for example. Just to check the mix. Headphones are far from a reference in other words. I know ... in todays mp3 player walkman world it should be a reference to some extend I suppose.


9 /10 times I put a set on my head is in the tracking room in preparation of a recording session. Check if all is normal there.

[shangoe]

for me its important that the headphone is open like my sennheiser hd600. i get tired and confused after a while working with closed headphones. i can work 8 hours with soft levels with no problem. mostly on editing and screening samples. when mixing i change monitors and hp from time to time.

[GYang]

Many experienced engineers rely on pair of monitors they know well, so, quite often they simply reject idea to work with headphones on critical phases of project.
The whole issue is based on simple fact that although sound perception might be somehow different, particular headphones provide another (IMO very important) 'look on whole picture' that can (easily, after getting used) result in better mix after all (and that is only what counts).
The difference between 300 $ hi-fi cans and high-res combo is much bigger than between Behringer nearfields and top of the line Westlake reference main monitors.
So, before conclusion, everyone interested should try correct path (DAC out to high res headphone amp with short hq cable)
and work on couple of mixes.
I guess that many will be surprised (and continue with it).

GYang