Speaker and Headphone Choices for listening to Classical Music

[G. String]

Apple means headphones are 32Ω, not output impedance.

So, I believe the impedance of your iPod is much lower, 2-5 Ω. That means the bass boost is very small and doesn't matter.

You are right. It turns out that it is 5. So is 50 ohms 598 too much to hear neutrally? Should the headphone be around 40 ohms?

[71 dB]

You are right. It turns out that it is 5. So is 50 ohms 598 too much to hear neutrally? Should the headphone be around 40 ohms?

No. HD 598 is marketed as 50 ohm but in reality it's impedance varies with frequency between about 60 and 275 ohms. Output impedance 5 ohm gives enough damping factor and the frequency response is flat enough.

The rule of thumb is damping factor should be AT LEAST 8, so 40 ohms or more in this case.

Frequency response flatness is more complex.

[G. String]

No. HD 598 is marketed as 50 ohm but in reality it's impedance varies with frequency between about 60 and 275 ohms. Output impedance 5 ohm gives enough damping factor and the frequency response is flat enough.

The rule of thumb is damping factor should be AT LEAST 8, so 40 ohms or more in this case.

Frequency response flatness is more complex.

Thank you. I wasn't in search for a headphone but I'll try HD598. Wouldn't that many ohm difference lower the maximum volume?

[71 dB]

Wouldn't that many ohm difference lower the maximum volume?

The voltage (U) generated by your player is divided between the output impedance (5 Ω) and HD-598 (60-275 Ω).

At 60 Ω it goes like this:

Over output impedance: 5*U/(5+60) = 0.077*U (7.7 %)
Over headphone: 60*U/(5+60) = 0.923*U (92.3 %)

At 275 Ω it goes like this:

Over output impedance: 5*U/(5+275) = 0.018*U (1.8 %)
Over headphone: 275*U/(5+275) = 0.982*U (98.2 %)

Everywhere else is somewhere between these. So, over 90 % of the voltage U generated is over the headphones. So, no.

[G. String]

@71db
I was probing Pono Player and my research about the argument of "better engineered recordings" vs "better players" for HD recordings brought me to this Wiki article.

Could you explain this paragraph in layman's terms in the context of last two short paragraphs? Does it mean that equipment capable of DR over 90 dB is useless as the studio's equipments wouldn't let the medium's DR pass over that?

The 16-bit compact disc has a theoretical dynamic range of about 96 dB for a triangle wave or 98 dB for sinusoidal signals. The perceived dynamic range of 16-bit audio can be as high as 120 dB with noise-shaped dither, taking advantage of the frequency response of the human ear. Digital audio with 20-bit digitization is theoretically capable of 120 dB dynamic range; similarly, 24-bit digital audio calculates to 144 dB dynamic range. All digital audio recording and playback chains include input and output converters and associated analog circuitry, significantly limiting practical dynamic range. Observed 16-bit digital audio dynamic range is about 90 dB.

In 1981, researchers at Ampex determined that a dynamic range of 118 dB on a dithered digital audio stream was necessary for subjective noise-free playback of music in quiet listening environments.

Since the early 1990s, it has been recommended by several authorities, including the Audio Engineering Society, that measurements of dynamic range be made with an audio signal present, which is then filtered out to get the noise floor. This avoids questionable measurements based on the use of blank media, or muting circuits.

[DavidW]

Recordings are usually mastered in 24 bit, not 16 bit.  The downconversion happens when the redbook cd is made.  This is just to have headroom to avoid these kind of problems.  Modern receivers use 24 bit dacs (which are needed to decode hd audio tracks on blu-rays) that also avoid this problem.  What you read is not actually an issue.

[71 dB]

@71db
I was probing Pono Player and my research about the argument of "better engineered recordings" vs "better players" for HD recordings brought me to this Wiki article.

Could you explain this paragraph in layman's terms in the context of last two short paragraphs? Does it mean that equipment capable of DR over 90 dB is useless as the studio's equipments wouldn't let the medium's DR pass over that?

The 16-bit compact disc has a theoretical dynamic range of about 96 dB for a triangle wave or 98 dB for sinusoidal signals. The perceived dynamic range of 16-bit audio can be as high as 120 dB with noise-shaped dither, taking advantage of the frequency response of the human ear. Digital audio with 20-bit digitization is theoretically capable of 120 dB dynamic range; similarly, 24-bit digital audio calculates to 144 dB dynamic range. All digital audio recording and playback chains include input and output converters and associated analog circuitry, significantly limiting practical dynamic range. Observed 16-bit digital audio dynamic range is about 90 dB.

In 1981, researchers at Ampex determined that a dynamic range of 118 dB on a dithered digital audio stream was necessary for subjective noise-free playback of music in quiet listening environments.

Since the early 1990s, it has been recommended by several authorities, including the Audio Engineering Society, that measurements of dynamic range be made with an audio signal present, which is then filtered out to get the noise floor. This avoids questionable measurements based on the use of blank media, or muting circuits.

Not easy to answer the way you want but I try.

The red paragraph must mean quiet studios. In a normal living room the noise floor is rarely below 20 dB, even if you think it's "completely quiet". If the noise floor is 20 dB, dynamic range of 90 dB means we can operate with levels between 20 dB and 110 dB. So, in your living room 16 bits is enough, especially if noise-shaped dither is used. 24 bits is for studios.

The green paragraph simply means avoiding muting circuits etc. in DR measurements. It doesn't say anything about needed DR.

Yes, in consumer electronics it's difficult to keep the noise floor low enough to justify more than 16 bits.

Some music needs more DR. Classical music needs all 16 bits while compressed pop music doesn't.

[G. String]

Not easy to answer the way you want but I try.

You made it quite intelligible. I wish I could keep you on my bookshelf.  Thanks a bunch!

[Holden]

Both are low impedance headphones with relatively high sensitivity.  They don't need to be amped, and the sound wouldn't really change that much unless the amp is colored.

btw are the M50s neutral? I've been thinking about buying them.  But I read that they were more like loudness curve headphones (elevated bass and treble).

The M50s are most definitely not neutral. They've been developed for bassheads as their sound signature is tuned to the lower end. They are quite accurate and have plenty of punch though I would question their suitability for chamber music and acoustic classical.

This what I have

Sennheiser IE 80s (IEMs)

Sennheiser HD580s

Shure SRH840s

Driven by:

Fiio E7/E9 DAC/Amp combo

Nuforce uDac 1 DAC/Amp

PA2V2 Headphone amp

Peerless Mk 1000 Floor Standing Speakers

Baklavaboy doesn't like the Shure 840s sound but I do as they are very neutral in their approach without being too clinical

I believe that a decent amp will make a difference to any set of headphones no matter how easy they are to drive. This is borne out with my Shures which sound much better when paired with any of my amps, including the PA2V2 which does not have a DAC stage.

[DavidW]

Holden, your rec for Shure headphones were awesome!  The 440s are great for classical.  Nice midcentric sound.  Thanks for the rec, it was several months ago or a year ago or so but yeah this is what classical music should sound like.

[andolink]

In a debate a while back in this thread regarding headphones, 71 dB set forth the idea that listening to music with headphones without using cross-feed is seriously undermined by what he calls "spatial distortion". 

I'd just like to say that I've completely joined 71 dB in his opinion and now recognized (from experience) that without cross-feed, one does not get the most out of the headphone listening experience.  Cross-feed produces a much more natural and realistic quality of sound with enhanced imaging and soundstage presentation.  There is some small loss of micro-detail but that micro-detail isn't natural anyway, at least not to my ears.

Thanks 71 dB for enlightening me about the great benefits of cross-fed headphone listening.

[71 dB]

In a debate a while back in this thread regarding headphones, 71 dB set forth the idea that listening to music with headphones without using cross-feed is seriously undermined by what he calls "spatial distortion".

I'd just like to say that I've completely joined 71 dB in his opinion and now recognized (from experience) that without cross-feed, one does not get the most out of the headphone listening experience.  Cross-feed produces a much more natural and realistic quality of sound with enhanced imaging and soundstage presentation.  There is some small loss of micro-detail but that micro-detail isn't natural anyway, at least not to my ears.

Thank you Andy for this online support! It's much appreciated!  0:) You have welcomed crossfeed into your life admirably.

The loss of "micro-detail" Andy mentions here seems to be a common misundertanding about crossfeed.
The detail crossfeed removes is unwanted spatial distortion (unnatural spatial information) and getting rid of it means
clear and natural sound. Similar removal of "detail" happens acoustically when listening to loudspeakers.
Noboby complains about that because it has always happened.

Thanks 71 dB for enlightening me about the great benefits of cross-fed headphone listening.

You are most welcome Andy! Enjoy your new freedom from spatial distortion! 

[Mookalafalas]

I finally got a pair of Sennheiser HD598 phones.  Very happy! I see other folks really like the Shure 840s, but for me the Senns are better in both sound and comfort.

[mc ukrneal]

I finally got a pair of Sennheiser HD598 phones.  Very happy! I see other folks really like the Shure 840s, but for me the Senns are better in both sound and comfort.

Headphones are a very personal thing though, in addition to the quality issues. The Senns are generally good, so I am glad you enjoy them.

[Jay F]

Meier, Headroom and FiiO all include cross feed and they encompass the range from high end to midrange to entry level.

Any recommendations?

[Mookalafalas]

Headphones are a very personal thing though, in addition to the quality issues.

  Definitely.  More objectively, the Shure 840s are sturdier and come with better packaging.  I've read on-line reviews where people "forget they have them on" and can "wear them for hours"--which is why I got them initially. However, I find them distracting and uncomfortable to wear almost as soon as I put them on. Probably this is due to real physiological differences as well as personal taste.  Anyone buying expensive phones should really go to a shop where you can try them on and listen for yourselves, or better yet, borrow a pair (or pairs) from someone so you can give them some extensive testing at home.  If this is not possible, and you don't mind being a bit crass, you could order your top two choices from Amazon and return the one you don't like

[71 dB]

I finally got a pair of Sennheiser HD598 phones.  Very happy! I see other folks really like the Shure 840s, but for me the Senns are better in both sound and comfort.

Sennheiser HD598 is very good. I really like the soundstage and the feel of being "in the best place of the hall". 

[xochitl]

so my trusty ER4s finally crapped out on me and i'm looking for another IEM that's nearly as flat [and not $1k]. so far only the Hifiman RE series seems to be comparable but i still have doubts. is my best bet just buying another ER4s? i don't really mind their bass presentation and i usually just EQ the 2khz bump out to make em pretty great

i have the Shure SRH940s for home use and overall i find them balanced with crossfeed [except for those couple bright spikes at 5khz and 10khz] but there's always the nagging at the back of my mind that i could do better. they need to the CLOSED though.

driving all thu a Leckerton UHA-4

[andolink]

Any recommendations?

I almost purchased Meier's Corda Jazz because of the cross-feed feature but then decided to go with a balanced amp from Audio-gd to take advantage of already owning a balanced CD player.  So I have no actual experience with the Jazz but everything I've heard about it from various sources, professional and amateur, indicates that it is excellent. 

[Pat B]

so my trusty ER4s finally crapped out on me and i'm looking for another IEM that's nearly as flat [and not $1k]. so far only the Hifiman RE series seems to be comparable but i still have doubts. is my best bet just buying another ER4s? i don't really mind their bass presentation and i usually just EQ the 2khz bump out to make em pretty great

Have you replaced the filters on your ER-4s?