GMG Classical Music Forum

What kind of speakers and headphones do you usually prefer? Neutral or smooth and warm (a little more bass)?

See here:
What audio system do you have, or plan on getting? (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,1069.0.html)

Quote from: North Star on March 26, 2014, 05:05:29 AM
See here:
What audio system do you have, or plan on getting? (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,1069.0.html)

Thanks. Would you summarize which type people simply prefer, neutral or warm, for me, too?

Quote from: G. String on March 26, 2014, 05:21:49 AM
Thanks. Would you summarize which type people simply prefer, neutral or warm, for me, too?

Everyone has different preferences, so it's not easy. I think I'm on the "warm" side, but there are a lot of folks who prefer more analytic sound. This even extends to record labels; a lot of people think Hyperion is the best at recording piano recitals, but I can't stand the Hyperion piano sound.

I prefer equipment that sounds right an never think about whetjer it sounds warm or clinical. And (at least for speakers, headphones I hate) the result for a given setuo, results depends as much on (really; mostly on) room size, acoustic setup and speaker placement (and your own hearing and muusic selections) than on the equipment itself. But I don't like an overtly clinical sound, preferring a focus on soundstage and overall perspective rather than an overt focus on details. To me that is right.   

Quote from: The new erato on March 26, 2014, 06:33:59 AM
headphones I hate

I believe you hate spatial distortion rather than headphones. Crossfeeding is the solution.  ;)

For headphones, I stand by the Sennheiser HD 598. A headphone that came strongly recommended to me by DavidW. I won't launch into how these headphones sound again, I gave a pretty decent description on the 'Headphones' thread in 'The Diner,' but let me just say I'll never wear another pair of headphones again and if anything were to happen to them, I'd replace them in a heartbeat.

Most decent speakers measure flat... but the reflections off of room walls change the frequency response, enhancing some frequencies, attenuating others.  This makes it difficult to recommend speakers.  They have to be voiced for your room.

But I will say:

1. Place speakers so that tweeters are ear level.
2. Place speakers to be at least 2 feet from any wall but preferably 3 feet.
3. See manufacturer's website for proper toe in, usually it is not directed at your eyes, but instead directed at your ears, that is to say only slightly toed in.
4. Your chair/couch should also be removed from any wall by at least 2 feet but preferably 3 feet.
5. Do not place hard surfaces such as tables between you and your speakers (due to reflection).
6. Ensure the speakers are in front of (and not on par with) your equipment.  If possible put your equipment on the side wall instead.
7. Volume match speakers.

These steps are much more important than just tossing out large amounts of money on expensive speakers.  I didn't know about some of these until recently, and my acoustics are improved.  These changes are worth it and free to do.

With headphones Sennheiser HD 598, 600, 650 are great.  AKG K550 is great.  Beyerdynamics dt880 is also great.  Those headphones are all close to neutral, and very resolving of detail.  I agree with 71 dB that crossfeed helps create a more natural stereo sound since recordings are mixed for speakers and not headphones.  Crossfeed can be found on some headphone amps and as an add-on to foobar, a program for Windows.

//

Quote from: 71 dB on March 26, 2014, 07:41:15 AM
I believe you hate spatial distortion rather than headphones. Crossfeeding is the solution.  ;)

No. I hate the claustrophobia of physically having them on my head and with a dedicated soundproofed listening room of 27 sq meters and big speakers, there fortunately is no reason I should love having them on either. Headphones can sound magnificent and natural (it seems plausible that cossfeeding is positive), but for longer listening sessions they make me desperate.

Quote from: Brian on March 26, 2014, 05:51:33 AM
Everyone has different preferences, so it's not easy. I think I'm on the "warm" side, but there are a lot of folks who prefer more analytic sound. This even extends to record labels; a lot of people think Hyperion is the best at recording piano recitals, but I can't stand the Hyperion piano sound.

In this context you should imagine neutrality and warmth as similar to equalizer bands. Neutral is similar to flat and smooth and warm is similar to low-range upped a bit. For instance rock is best with V-Shaped bands, both low and high ranges enhanced but middle-range untouched. As it is obvious that psychoacoustics has a major role in speakers but this is very crucial for headphones. My experience is, seasoned classical music listeners who are interested in hifi almost exclusively prefer neutral headphones, such as Sennheiser HD598. I sometimes need more doublebass or cello.

Quote from: The new erato on March 26, 2014, 09:42:47 AM
I hate the claustrophobia of physically having them on my head

Well, there are uncomfortable headphones as there are comfortable ones. Maybe you only think it's physically having them on your head,  when the spatial distortion is actually the main reason of discomfort?

Quote from: The new erato on March 26, 2014, 09:42:47 AMAnd with a dedicated soundproofed listening room of 27 sq meters and big speakers, there fortunately is no reason I should love having them on either. Headphones can sound magnificent and natural (it seems plausible that cossfeeding is positive), but for longer listening sessions they make me desperate.

Well, you are lucky to have such a room for listening. Most people have neighbours and can't play loudspeakers loud all night long. Luckily my Sennheiser HD 598 headphones + a self-constructed audio amplifier driven headphone adapter with 6 crossfeed levels to choose from provide stunning sound quality* on any reasonable recording without driving my neighbours crazy.

* Yes, stunning. Distortion-free sound free of room interferencies and with a sound image similar to that of loudspeakers (depending the recording, of course). It's actually as if the sound was fed directly to my brain with wires.  8)

Quote from: DavidW on March 26, 2014, 09:36:08 AM
Most decent speakers measure flat... but the reflections off of room walls change the frequency response, enhancing some frequencies, attenuating others.  This makes it difficult to recommend speakers.  They have to be voiced for your room.

Many speakers measure flat on axis, but there's often discontinuity problems with power response (the amount of sound power radiated to all directions). This means that these speakers won't sound neutral (flat) in a room when the flat response on axis is "coloured" with not so "flat" reverberation.

Quote from: DavidW on March 26, 2014, 09:36:08 AMBut I will say:

1. Place speakers so that tweeters are ear level.
2. Place speakers to be at least 2 feet from any wall but preferably 3 feet.
3. See manufacturer's website for proper toe in, usually it is not directed at your eyes, but instead directed at your ears, that is to say only slightly toed in.
4. Your chair/couch should also be removed from any wall by at least 2 feet but preferably 3 feet.
5. Do not place hard surfaces such as tables between you and your speakers (due to reflection).
6. Ensure the speakers are in front of (and not on par with) your equipment.  If possible put your equipment on the side wall instead.
7. Volume match speakers.

Yeah, these are valid general rules, but one should always experiment, since you never know exactly what set up gives the best result. Also, most of the time people must compromize, unfortunately.

Quote from: DavidW on March 26, 2014, 09:36:08 AMThese steps are much more important than just tossing out large amounts of money on expensive speakers.  I didn't know about some of these until recently, and my acoustics are improved.  These changes are worth it and free to do.

Yep, acoustics is very important. Sound behaves in very complex ways, especially at low frequencies where room modes dominate. Loudpeakers just won't sound good if they are on granted "the best place in the house".

Quote from: DavidW on March 26, 2014, 09:36:08 AMI agree with 71 dB that crossfeed helps create a more natural stereo sound since recordings are mixed for speakers and not headphones.  Crossfeed can be found on some headphone amps and as an add-on to foobar, a program for Windows.

Crossfeeders are easy and cheap to construct yourself if you can hold a soldering iron. Designing them is great fun!  8)

Quote from: Mirror Image on March 26, 2014, 07:45:03 AM
For headphones, I stand by the Sennheiser HD 598. A headphone that came strongly recommended to me by DavidW. I won't launch into how these headphones sound again, I gave a pretty decent description on the 'Headphones' thread in 'The Diner,' but let me just say I'll never wear another pair of headphones again and if anything were to happen to them, I'd replace them in a heartbeat.

Seconded. I'm not sure what model number my Senns are, but they're both very clear and very warm. None better. I actually had the covers replaced years ago. 8)

Quote from: jochanaan on March 26, 2014, 01:03:54 PM
Seconded. I'm not sure what model number my Senns are, but they're both very clear and very warm. None better. I actually had the covers replaced years ago. 8)

I have some N/C Senns. I probably need a vanilla pair, as the  unit is awkward, but the sound is certainly good. And very effective noise cancelling.

Quote from: The new erato on March 26, 2014, 09:42:47 AM
//No. I hate the claustrophobia of physically having them on my head and with a dedicated soundproofed listening room of 27 sq meters and big speakers, there fortunately is no reason I should love having them on either. Headphones can sound magnificent and natural (it seems plausible that cossfeeding is positive), but for longer listening sessions they make me desperate.

I have a pair of AKG 401s that sit very lightly on the ears and never feel confining or uncomfortable.  They are constructed with a support band so that they do no put pressure on the ears.  These are an old model, and I don't know if the more recent replacement models are as comfortable.  Look for similar models with the support band.

More recently I've been using Sennheiser HD650s, which aren't as comfortable, but do sound great.

btw even though they are not big league speakers like the audiophiles on this forum use, I really enjoy the Polk Audio Lsi bookshelves.  I bought them a bit over a year ago.  Unlike their entry level monitor speakers, they sound warm, mid-centric and never harsh. 

Quote from: DavidW on March 27, 2014, 06:35:01 AM
btw even though they are not big league speakers like the audiophiles on this forum use, I really enjoy the Polk Audio Lsi bookshelves.  I bought them a bit over a year ago.  Unlike their entry level monitor speakers, they sound warm, mid-centric and never harsh.

What was your cost, David?

Small speaksers can sound amazingly fine om acoustical music when not pushed to extremes of dynamics and bass. I've got a pair of Usher S 520 entry level bookshelf speakers:

(http://zenn.com.sg/Usher_S520.JPG)

in my cabin and they sound amazingly good with the right material. Same color too!

Quote from: The new erato on March 27, 2014, 07:22:29 AM
Small speaksers can sound amazingly fine om acoustical music when not pushed to extremes of dynamics and bass.

Agree although I am in a different price range than you. My office has a pair of Mission 731i's (I found them used for around $100 on ebay). I never A-B'ed them, but I have been very happy with them.

Sennheiser HD 800s are mercilessly revealing--just the way I like it!  :)

(http://www.blessthisstuff.com/imagens/stuff/img_sennheiser_hd_800_headphones_2.jpg)

Quote from: DavidW on March 27, 2014, 06:35:01 AM
btw even though they are not big league speakers like the audiophiles on this forum use, I really enjoy the Polk Audio Lsi bookshelves.  I bought them a bit over a year ago.  Unlike their entry level monitor speakers, they sound warm, mid-centric and never harsh.

Maybe something like this is an option for me; I have a tiny apartment and if I pushed the couch and the speakers two feet out from their respective walls, I'd be able to sit on the couch and kick the speakers! That said, I don't know the first thing about these sound systems and what all parts are needed between the disc drive and the speakers themselves.

Quote from: Bogey on March 27, 2014, 06:42:31 AM
What was your cost, David?

They retail for a $1000/pair, I bought them on amazon for $400/pair! :)  You can find a favorable review of them on stereophile.

Quote from: Brian on March 27, 2014, 08:56:30 AM
Maybe something like this is an option for me; I have a tiny apartment and if I pushed the couch and the speakers two feet out from their respective walls, I'd be able to sit on the couch and kick the speakers! That said, I don't know the first thing about these sound systems and what all parts are needed between the disc drive and the speakers themselves.

Bookshelves sound much better in small rooms like that than towers do.  I use a Denon AVR as the inbetween speakers and source.  There is something neato I saw on Crutchfield.  It is a Marantz amp that has a cd player built in and also streams audio.  A nice all in one solution that if I didn't have my AVR would have been tempted by.

I love headphones, and my preferences are towards the more coloured ones. Current favourites are the Audio-Technica W3000ANV and W5000, next to the Beyerdynamic T5p and T1. This already illustrates one of the things I like so much about headphones, you can change sound signature at a whim.

I like to keep the rest of the chain fairly neutral (maybe slightly warm) and let the headphones provide the colouration.

Quote from: The new erato on March 26, 2014, 06:33:59 AM
I prefer equipment that sounds right an never think about whetjer it sounds warm or clinical. And (at least for speakers, headphones I hate) the result for a given setuo, results depends as much on (really; mostly on) room size, acoustic setup and speaker placement (and your own hearing and muusic selections) than on the equipment itself. But I don't like an overtly clinical sound, preferring a focus on soundstage and overall perspective rather than an overt focus on details. To me that is right.   

  I agree wholeheartedly here. I too prefer a wide soundstage and overall perspective over a clinical sound. This is especially true for opera/drama drama. To hear a dramatic opera unfold sonically before you where you no longer need the visual to aprreciate what is happening on stage is a priceless experience. I believe for opera/music drama you really do need floor standing speakers a decent amp and CD player to match. Headphones can be remarkably clear but can they sonically recreate an impressive soundstage like floor standing speakers can?

marvin

Quote from: The new erato on March 26, 2014, 06:33:59 AM
I prefer equipment that sounds right an never think about whetjer it sounds warm or clinical. And (at least for speakers, headphones I hate) the result for a given setuo, results depends as much on (really; mostly on) room size, acoustic setup and speaker placement (and your own hearing and muusic selections) than on the equipment itself. But I don't like an overtly clinical sound, preferring a focus on soundstage and overall perspective rather than an overt focus on details. To me that is right.   

Quote from: marvinbrown on March 27, 2014, 01:08:51 PM
  I agree wholeheartedly here. I too prefer a wide soundstage and overall perspective over a clinical sound. This is especially true for opera/drama drama. To hear a dramatic opera unfold sonically before you where you no longer need the visual to aprreciate what is happening on stage is a priceless experience. I believe for opera/music drama you really do need floor standing speakers a decent amp and CD player to match. Headphones can be remarkably clear but can they sonically recreate an impressive soundstage like floor standing speakers can?

marvin

Aye.  Count me in agreement with these comments.  Recently 'stopped using' a rather splendid Sony Home Theater system because of its very clear, clinical sound.  Nothing wrong with it, was great really, but I want to hear the character and resonance in the music rather than shapeless acoustic clarity.  My Marantz / Rega setup imparts all the character and resonance I could ever want in our music.   :D  (Although the Sony still gets used for telly, movies, games, etc...it's perfect for those things).

Hi all, I'm new here.  Interesting to hear about what everyone's using for their music playback.

Here's my own rather modest gear:

Audiolab 8200CD (CD player)
NAD C356BEE (integrated amp)
PSB Imagine T (floorstanding speakers)
SVS SB 12-NSD (subwoofer)

HiFiMan HE-500 (planar-magnetic headphone)
Audio-gd NFB-6 (integrated headphone amp)

Norse Audio Skuld 2 Litz UPOCC HiFiMan cable
Belden 1800F Balanced interconnects

My avatar is indeed my HE-500 headphones.

Is that a tube amp you have Scott?

I've had a few pairs of headphones over the years, currently I use two pairs.  A set of noise cancelling headphones for commuting (Goldring NS1000's) which I use with a mobile DAC (Fiio E18).  For home use I have Sennheiser 650s.

Assuming your headphones are being used with a number of sources I'd recommend as flat a response as possible.  Any "characterful" headphones will be hit or miss when switching sources.

Quote from: andolink on March 28, 2014, 12:51:56 AM
Hi all, I'm new here.  Interesting to hear about what everyone's using for their music playback.

Here's my own rather modest gear:

:
Audio-gd NFB-6 (integrated headphone amp)
:

Unfortunately your otherwise great $400 headphone amp seems to lack crossfeeding, which is extremely important to kill spatial distortion.

Quote from: 71 dB on March 29, 2014, 03:22:22 AM
Unfortunately your otherwise great $400 headphone amp seems to lack crossfeeding, which is extremely important to kill spatial distortion.

Very few headphone amps include a crossfeed circuit.   I did find this thread at Head Fi listing some options:

http://www.head-fi.org/t/625678/crossfeed-amps

If your listening from a music server, a digital implementation might be an option.

Quote from: 71 dB on March 29, 2014, 03:22:22 AM
Unfortunately your otherwise great $400 headphone amp seems to lack crossfeeding, which is extremely important to kill spatial distortion.

I seriously investigated crossfeed when considering a headphone amp to buy but found as many arguments con as pro.  The way it's implemented is crucial and very few of even the most high end h/p amps use it.  I find it's a rare recording that  has such wide channel separation that the soundstage sounds unnatural.  When I come across such, I just use my speaker gear.  In fact many recordings (especially chamber music) sound better in imaging, detail and presence using my headphones than speakers.  The speakers I find always preferable in orchestral music, opera, oratorio, etc.

Quote from: 71 dB on March 29, 2014, 03:22:22 AM
Unfortunately your otherwise great $400 headphone amp seems to lack crossfeeding, which is extremely important to kill spatial distortion.

This is nonsense. Cross-feed is like training-wheels, it helps people get used to headphone listening when they're new to the experience. But after a while, most people can do without it and actually prefer to listen without cross-feed, because they've become adjusted to the way headphones present the soundstage. Moreover, cross-feed always leads to deterioration of the sound, because you feed part of the information of one channel into the other, which causes cancellation of frequencies in that are in opposite phase (and there's also the added circuitry).

Quote from: Daverz on March 29, 2014, 04:52:26 AM
Very few headphone amps include a crossfeed circuit.

Yes, this is unfortunate.

Quote from: Daverz on March 29, 2014, 04:52:26 AMI did find this thread at Head Fi listing some options:
If your listening from a music server, a digital implementation might be an option.

Of course.  ;) For us Mac user's there's Vox player.

Quote from: andolink on March 29, 2014, 05:37:43 AM
I seriously investigated crossfeed when considering a headphone amp to buy but found as many arguments con as pro.  The way it's implemented is crucial and very few of even the most high end h/p amps use it.  I find it's a rare recording that  has such wide channel separation that the soundstage sounds unnatural.  When I come across such, I just use my speaker gear.  In fact many recordings (especially chamber music) sound better in imaging, detail and presence using my headphones than speakers.  The speakers I find always preferable in orchestral music, opera, oratorio, etc.

Well, to my experience nearly all stereophonic recordings benefit from crossfeeding, because there is almost always some spatial distortion depending on how the recording is done. Our hearing is very sensitive to differencies (both level and timing) between left and right ear and our head interprets excessive differencies as spatial distortion. Crossfeeding removes something from the sound, but it is not musical detail, it's spatial distortion that of course changes in time according to the music and therefore might seem as musical detail. But it is not. It's like saying harmonic distortion is musical detail. Of course it's not. It's distortion!

I usually prefer stronger crossfeeding with orchestral music. That might explain your preferencies. Spatial distortion makes orchestral music VERY messy. Anyway, chamber music needs some crossfeeding too.

Crossfeeding is essential. You can always turn it of when the miracle recording is playing.

This is just something for technicians not for people who want to enjoy music. I'm satisfied with my mp3 player with (cheap) sennheiser ear buds.

I have a DAC, but my mp3 player is a nicer experience. I use the DAC of course to save space. I want the room to fill with music, so no headphones. If I want I can use the headphone amplifier feature on my DAC. I think no cross-feed. I think Foobar has a crossfeed feature.

One option left: cd's through headphone which I rarely do. Here again no crossfeed needed. My ears are used playing with mp3 player without crossfeed.

Crossfeed makes the sound worse, just admit it.

Quote from: Drosera on March 29, 2014, 05:54:24 AM
This is nonsense. Cross-feed is like training-wheels, it helps people get used to headphone listening when they're new to the experience. But after a while, most people can do without it and actually prefer to listen without cross-feed, because they've become adjusted to the way headphones present the soundstage. Moreover, cross-feed always leads to deterioration of the sound, because you feed part of the information of one channel into the other, which causes cancellation of frequencies in that are in opposite phase (and there's also the added circuitry).

Sorry, but you have got it wrong. I listened without crossfeeding almost 2 decades because I was stupid and ignorant with it. Two years ago I found crossfeeding and it revolutionized my headphone listening. So, what you say is bs. For almost all recordings, uncrossfeeded sound is unnatural. It contain level and phase differencies much larger than can be heard with natural sounds around us.

What you say about "deterioration of the sound" happens always with loudpeakers. Why aren't you worried about that?

Opposite phase: weaker crossfeeding doesn't cancel much. Statistically recordings contain phase differencies equally of all angles. Statistically nothing is canceled. Recording containing strong opposite phases are idiotic. Do you even have those? Getting rid of spatial distortion is 1000 more important than worrying about opposite canceling.

Crossfeeding happens only at low frequencies, below 1000 Hz or so. Bass doesn't sound real unless it's nearly monophonic.

Crossfeeding actually reveals detail because more detail is revealed under spatial distortion. This is perhaps the point people don't get about crossfeeding.

Quote from: 71 dB on March 29, 2014, 06:26:43 AM
Sorry, but you have got it wrong. I listened without crossfeeding almost 2 decades because I was stupid and ignorant with it. Two years ago I found crossfeeding and it revolutionized my headphone listening. So, what you say is bs. For almost all recordings, uncrossfeeded sound is unnatural. It contain level and phase differencies much larger than can be heard with natural sounds around us.

Not to argue too much from authority, but you're basically saying that all engineers in the high-end headphone amp game have it wrong. Because I can't think of single true high-end headphone amplifier that has crossfeed, and yet, implementing cross-feed, even a good implementation, is hardly rocket-science. Also, it appears you simply have a strong preference for cross-feed,  because headphones weren't quite working for you before this. Yet, what I get from headphones is a solid, consistent and evenly distributed 'headstage' ( to use the jargon) and cross-feed diminishes this both spatially and tonally.

Quote from: 71 dB on March 29, 2014, 06:26:43 AM
What you say about "deterioration of the sound" happens always with loudpeakers. Why aren't you worried about that?

Feeding two signals into each other is very different from to loudspeakers producing actual full-spectrum sound waves.

Quote from: 71 dB on March 29, 2014, 06:26:43 AM
Opposite phase: weaker crossfeeding doesn't cancel much. Statistically recordings contain phase differencies equally of all angles. Statistically nothing is canceled. Recording containing strong opposite phases are idiotic. Do you even have those? Getting rid of spatial distortion is 1000 more important than worrying about opposite canceling.

Not much? Way too much for me. And just a thousand times?  :) Again you seem to be stating personal preference rather than fact.

Quote from: 71 dB on March 29, 2014, 06:26:43 AM
Crossfeeding actually reveals detail because more detail is revealed under spatial distortion. This is perhaps to point people don't get about crossfeeding.

Well, that would be amazing. Magic cross-feed. Are there schematics for this somewhere? I may be very sceptical, but I will always remain a curious fellow as well (in more than one way).

Quote from: Drosera on March 29, 2014, 07:00:44 AM
Not to argue too much from authority, but you're basically saying that all engineers in the high-end headphone amp game have it wrong. Because I can't think of single true high-end headphone amplifier that has crossfeed, and yet, implementing cross-feed, even a good implementation, is hardly rocket-science. Also, it appears you simply have a strong preference for cross-feed,  because headphones weren't quite working for you before this. Yet, what I get from headphones is a solid, consistent and evenly distributed 'headstage' ( to use the jargon) and cross-feed diminishes this both spatially and tonally.

Yes, headphone amps without crossfeed are kind of wrong (otherwise they can be excellent).

For example, Meier-audio's (http://www.meier-audio.homepage.t-online.de/amplifiers.htm) headphone amps have crossfeed.

Crossfeed makes the soundstage narrower and that's good because without crossfeeding most of the sound comes from your shoulders near your ears and that is simply wrong. Crossfeeding "bends" the sound forward, away form your ears were it belongs. If you get "evenly distributed 'headstage'" without crossfeed, your recordings are strangely headphone optimized. Mine aren't, because most of them are made for louspeakers without much consideration of headphones.

Crossfeeding doesn't diminish tonally anything. It dimishes spatial distortion in brain. You lose garbage with crossfeed and that's great. If it did diminish tonally, all sounds we hear would be dimished tonally since all sounds around us are acoustically crossfeeded to our ears.

Quote from: Drosera on March 29, 2014, 07:00:44 AMFeeding two signals into each other is very different from to loudspeakers producing actual full-spectrum sound waves.

Yes, different. The crossfeed-effect is almost the same since loudpeaker crossfeed "uses" real HRTF, while headphone crossfeed is approximation of HRTF. Loudspeaker sound is damaged by room acoustics, headphone sound isn't. Even in acoustically good listening room loudspeaker sound is affected by the acoustics much more than headphone sound by crossfeeding.

Full-spectrum sound waves? 20-20000 Hz? Well, some loudspeakers do that. So do some headphones. Crossfeeding has nothing to do with this.

Quote from: Drosera on March 29, 2014, 07:00:44 AMNot much? Way too much for me. And just a thousand times?  :) Again you seem to be stating personal preference rather than fact.

We can do the math: Lets say we use -6 dB crossfeeding. Ipsilateral sound (ref. 0 dB = 1). Contralateral out-of-phase sound (ref. -6 dB = -0.25). Sum of these signals = 1 - 0.25 = 0.75 (ref. -2.5 dB).

Now, this is an extreme example since real life recordings just don't contain equal magnitude opposite phase signals below 1000 Hz (analyse your recordings if you don't believe me).

What your room does to the bass frequencies is much worse than 2.5 dB, about 10 times worse actually and it happens all the time!

Quote from: Drosera on March 29, 2014, 07:00:44 AMWell, that would be amazing. Magic cross-feed. Are there schematics for this somewhere? I may be very sceptical, but I will always remain a curious fellow as well (in more than one way).

Nothing magical about it really. Detail hidden by spatial distortion is revealed when spatial distortion is removed. It's logical. I have many schematics of different kind of crossfeeders because I like designing and constructing them. The smallest one is for my iPod (just a 0.56 mH coil and resitor between left and right channel - works very nicely considering the extreme simplicity), but here's the schematics for my current headphone adapter with 6 crossfeed levels:

Quote from: Drosera on March 29, 2014, 07:00:44 AM
Not to argue too much from authority, but you're basically saying that all engineers in the high-end headphone amp game have it wrong. Because I can't think of single true high-end headphone amplifier that has crossfeed,

Is that the one true scotsman fallacy?  You define high-end headphone amps as the headphone amps that don't include cross feed?  Meier, Headroom and FiiO all include cross feed and they encompass the range from high end to midrange to entry level.

QuoteFeeding two signals into each other is very different from to loudspeakers producing actual full-spectrum sound waves.

And the sound produced by dozens if not hundreds of instruments in a concert hall is very different from two point sources in a small room, but that doesn't stop me from using my speakers to listen to symphonic music.

QuoteNot much? Way too much for me.

Crossfeed uses interference from waves separated by a fraction of a wavelength, the interference is mostly constructive.  What is "way too much" is just a slight decrease in amplitude.  Enough to be audible, not enough to be distractingly destructive to most people.

QuoteWell, that would be amazing. Magic cross-feed.

It's not magic, it's science.  It is very easy for sounds to be what is called masked by other sounds.  Just see our discussion in the Haydn thread about the use of harpsichord in the symphonies for an example of masking.  If a recording is mastered to be played back on speakers, you might have sounds not masking say a flute playing softly due to destructive interference with sounds produced by other instruments.  Without that destructive interference, those instruments might drown out that flute.  The recordings are mastered for speaker playback, so it will sound right on speakers but not right through headphones.

Many recordings sound just fine on headphones without cross feed.  But I have plenty that do not.  Not for the subtle effects mentioned above, but just  poor imaging.  I can't stand the Angeles Quartet performing Haydn on headphones because it sounds very asymmetric between each headphone.  And the recordings sound perfect through speakers.

Now if you don't care, you don't like cross feed that is your choice... but you should know that there is a logical, rational reason for the use of cross feed.

Spatial distortion is like graffiti sprayed on a crumpled silverscreen. Crossfeeding makes the screen flat (natural spatial cues) and clean (free of spatial distortion). The sound "projected" on such screen is smooth, steady and serene. Crossfeeded music sounds like it is located in silent, intact space instead of noisy and cracked space.

Quote from: DavidW on March 29, 2014, 09:25:18 AM
Crossfeed uses interference from waves separated by a fraction of a wavelength, the interference is mostly constructive.  What is "way too much" is just a slight decrease in amplitude.  Enough to be audible, not enough to be distractingly destructive to most people.

Yes. Crossfeeded signals are delayed by 200-300 µs (7-10 cm or 3-4 inches). At 800 Hz, a typical cut off frequency of crossfeeding, the wavelength of sound is about 43 cm or 17 inches. 200-300 µs timing difference corresponds angles of about 25°-35° for arriving sound (same as with loudpeakers).

Crossfeeding doesn't really decrease amplitude, unless the recording is really perverse, in which case nobody in their right mind can listen to it, crossfeed or not. Music is a very complex and alternating signal. One has to do the analyses statistically when calculating what crossfeeding does. Statistically half of the stuff is "off phase" and the other half "on phase", so it's zero sum in practise. Well, it isn't that simple, since audio channels tend to correlate, but these issues have been "taken care off" in crossfeed designs. In my design I showed, the 1.5µF capasitor and the two 240 Ω resistors do this performing subtle treble boost effect. The benefits of crossfeeding are clearly massive compared to these "destructivity" worries.

Quote from: DavidW on March 29, 2014, 09:25:18 AMMany recordings sound just fine on headphones without cross feed.  But I have plenty that do not.  Not for the subtle effects mentioned above, but just  poor imaging.  I can't stand the Angeles Quartet performing Haydn on headphones because it sounds very asymmetric between each headphone.  And the recordings sound perfect through speakers.

Even those recordings that sound just fine as they are usually benefit from weak crossfeeding. Graupner's Partitas for Harpsichord on Naxos (8.570459) doesn't need crossfeeding.

I don't have that Haydn disc, but it probably would sound good with strong crossfeed (louspeakers mean strong acoustic crossfeeding).

So, do you prefer neutral or smooth and warm???   >:( >:D

Quote from: G. String on March 29, 2014, 12:29:26 PM
So, do you prefer neutral or smooth and warm???   >:( >:D

I take it you ask me? Smooth means neutral here (opposite of crumpled = non-neutral). That's my point: Uncrossfeeded sound is rarely neutral with headphones, because it's terrorized by spatial distortion. Taking distortion away with crossfeeding gives "neutral" sound.

Properly designed crossfeeders don't touch bass/treble balance, so they don't make the sound warmer or colder.

Neutral, natural, precise and distortion-free ("High Fidelity") sound is my thing (and should be everyone's thing for that matter) and crossfeeding helps a lot getting that. 

Well I'm always in favor of whatever increases neutrality and decreases distortion so I'm perfectly willing to add a cross-feed circuit to my gear to at least see what the benefits or drawbacks might be.  Is the Meier amp (I almost bought the Corda Jazz when in the market for an amp) an example of cross-feed implementation you like?

Quote from: 71 dB on March 29, 2014, 01:55:01 PMUncrossfeeded

Uncrossfed?

Quote from: andolink on March 29, 2014, 03:25:18 PM
Well I'm always in favor of whatever increases neutrality and decreases distortion so I'm perfectly willing to add a cross-feed circuit to my gear to at least see what the benefits or drawbacks might be.

Is the Meier amp (I almost bought the Corda Jazz when in the market for an amp) an example of cross-feed implementation you like?

Crossfeeding means a change of how you think about headphone listening. For me it was a huge eureka -moment. Recordings are made for loudspeakers, so things go wrong with headphones. People just think spatial distortion is part of headphone sound and not a distortion at all. For beginners the benefit of crossfeed reveals itself slowly (hours rather than minutes), but when one gets the spatial distortion thing, there is no doubt about it. Crossfeeded sound is natural, less harsh, "peaceful" and free of extreme spatial effects. That's why some people may think crossfeeding removes something, but that's not the case. What is removed doesn't belong to the music in the first place and are absent in loudspeaker listening. 

Meier Audio uses good crossfeed circuits. Good products all I know, but I prefer self-constructed crossfeeders/headphone adapters (much cheaper and I can have the crossfeed levels I want).

Quote from: Jay F on March 29, 2014, 03:55:01 PM
Uncrossfed?

Yes.  :D

Thanks for quantifying and elaborating 71 dB.

People arguing about Crossfade just can't stand others to listen by loudspeakers.

Quote from: DavidW on March 29, 2014, 08:52:21 PM
Thanks for quantifying and elaborating 71 dB.

The idea of crossfeeding has been around for 60 years of so. Back in the beginning headphones and other audio gear where much worse than today and spatial distortion was "least of the problems". Even commercial products where brought to the market, but they didn't sell. People didn't listen to music with headphones that much and the benefits where iffy, since sound quality was compromised in many ways.

Jump ahead 50-60 years. Today we use headphones much more and headphones have developped to provide extremely precise sound. All the other problems have been solved, but spatial distortion is till there for most people. The good news is crossfeeding is technically easy. The bad news is people are ignorant and unwilling to open their eyes (ears) to a problem they don't know existed: spatial distortion. Despite of my education (acoustics engineering) I was ignorant to spatial distortion for years until a few years back I realised there are serious problems with headphone listening (another smaller, but significant problem is too high headphone jack output impedance of many devices).

So, ashamed of my years of ignorance I have been "correcting my mistakes". Headphone adapters and crossfeeders have became an "obsession" to me. I feel the spatial distortion problem should be addressed much more seriously. It's not just "super-stereo giving headache to some people". It's distortion created by brain and it ruins the listening experience. It's not rational to say we better just "get used to it". We don't need to "get used to distortion" in 21st century.

Line level crossfeeders are simple, cheap to construct (half dozen resistors + few capasitors cost few dollars/euros/pounds/whatever). These crossfeeders work properly. I made two of these because it's fun. I gave the other one to my friend. He has it between the pre out and main in connectors of his NAD 302 amplifier. I also gave him a headphone extension cable with 10 Ω resistors soldered between signal and ground wires. So, for a few bucks he has crossfeeding and a "headphone amp" with effective output impedance of 10 Ω meaning satisfactory damping factor of 20 with his old Sennheiser HD-580 headphones. Not exactly "high end", but a massive improvement for a few buck! High end manufacturers say you need snake oil and rocks from Mars. Engineers do what is needed for the price of a coffee cup.  ;D

My friend isn't as demanding as I am. I prefer "high end" quality without paying "high end" prices. So, I don't settle at impedance reduction cable tricks. I use a headphone adapter connected to the loudspeaker terminals of my amp. It attennuates the signal by a factor of about 1000, does crossfeeding (6 levels to choose from) and some other tricks like mono sound and provides an output impedance of 1 Ω for my Sennheiser HD-598 headphones. I posted the schematics of this apparatus in my earlier response. It works and measures very well. Of course, some people don't believe it, not before I dip the damn thing in snake oil.  ;D

The parts for my current headphone adapter costs about 50 euros. Most of that goes to the box, swithes and connectors. Of course, it took many many hours to design and construct it, but was fun, a wonderful hobby. Try and find a commercial product with six crossfeed levels!

Those who can't design and construct crossfeeders themselves can ask help from someone who can or buy commercial products.

The crossfeeders in commercial headphone amps typically use crossfeed levels of -10 to -6 dB. My adapter goes from -10 to -1 dB, so I can crossfeed harder if needed and there is a need for that quite often. Classical music usually needs crossfeeding around -10 to -5 dB, while King Crimson's and Tangerine Dream's albums seem to need -1 dB crossfeeding to be tamed enough. Movies (when watching tv/dvd/Blu-ray) have originally multichannel sound. When those channels are downmixed to stereo for headphones, the surround channels produce strong spatial distortion. So, -1 dB crossfeeding is needed for movies. This goes for multichannel SACDs too. In fact, multichannel SACD's sound extremely good, when the downmix algorithm is Lt/Rt (Left total/Right total) and strong -1 dB crossfeed is used. So, crossfeeding makes multichannel sound beneficial with headphones, not only with loudspeakers.

Quote from: Henk on March 30, 2014, 03:46:03 AM
People arguing about Crossfade just can't stand others to listen by loudspeakers.

Actually people who prefer loudspeakers should really love crossfeeding because it makes headphone sound similar to loudspeaker sound (in respect of sound image). Loudspeaker sound is ALWAYS crossfed (strongly) acoustically.

I have nothing against people who listen to loudspeakers mainly/only, but if you listen with headphones, crossfeed!

Quote from: 71 dB on March 30, 2014, 03:55:55 AM
The idea of crossfeeding has been around for 60 years of so. Back in the beginning headphones and other audio gear where much worse than today and spatial distortion was "least of the problems". Even commercial products where brought to the market, but they didn't sell. People didn't listen to music with headphones that much and the benefits where iffy, since sound quality was compromised in many ways.

Jump ahead 50-60 years. Today we use headphones much more and headphones have developped to provide extremely precise sound. All the other problems have been solved, but spatial distortion is till there for most people. The good news is crossfeeding is technically easy. The bad news is people are ignorant and unwilling to open their eyes (ears) to a problem they don't know existed: spatial distortion. Despite of my education (acoustics engineering) I was ignorant to spatial distortion for years until a few years back I realised there are serious problems with headphone listening (another smaller, but significant problem is too high headphone jack output impedance of many devices).

So, ashamed of my years of ignorance I have been "correcting my mistakes". Headphone adapters and crossfeeders have became an "obsession" to me. I feel the spatial distortion problem should be addressed much more seriously. It's not just "super-stereo giving headache to some people". It's distortion created by brain and it ruins the listening experience. It's not rational to say we better just "get used to it". We don't need to "get used to distortion" in 21st century.

Line level crossfeeders are simple, cheap to construct (half dozen resistors + few capasitors cost few dollars/euros/pounds/whatever). These crossfeeders work properly. I made two of these because it's fun. I gave the other one to my friend. He has it between the pre out and main in connectors of his NAD 302 amplifier. I also gave him a headphone extension cable with 10 Ω resistors soldered between signal and ground wires. So, for a few bucks he has crossfeeding and a "headphone amp" with effective output impedance of 10 Ω meaning satisfactory damping factor of 20 with his old Sennheiser HD-580 headphones. Not exactly "high end", but a massive improvement for a few buck! High end manufacturers say you need snake oil and rocks from Mars. Engineers do what is needed for the price of a coffee cup.  ;D

My friend isn't as demanding as I am. I prefer "high end" quality without paying "high end" prices. So, I don't settle at impedance reduction cable tricks. I use a headphone adapter connected to the loudspeaker terminals of my amp. It attennuates the signal by a factor of about 1000, does crossfeeding (6 levels to choose from) and some other tricks like mono sound and provides an output impedance of 1 Ω for my Sennheiser HD-598 headphones. I posted the schematics of this apparatus in my earlier response. It works and measures very well. Of course, some people don't believe it, not before I dip the damn thing in snake oil.  ;D

The parts for my current headphone adapter costs about 50 euros. Most of that goes to the box, swithes and connectors. Of course, it took many many hours to design and construct it, but was fun, a wonderful hobby. Try and find a commercial product with six crossfeed levels!

Those who can't design and construct crossfeeders themselves can ask help from someone who can or buy commercial products.

The crossfeeders in commercial headphone amps typically use crossfeed levels of -10 to -6 dB. My adapter goes from -10 to -1 dB, so I can crossfeed harder if needed and there is a need for that quite often. Classical music usually needs crossfeeding around -10 to -5 dB, while King Crimson's and Tangerine Dream's albums seem to need -1 dB crossfeeding to be tamed enough. Movies (when watching tv/dvd/Blu-ray) have originally multichannel sound. When those channels are downmixed to stereo for headphones, the surround channels produce strong spatial distortion. So, -1 dB crossfeeding is needed for movies. This goes for multichannel SACDs too. In fact, multichannel SACD's sound extremely good, when the downmix algorithm is Lt/Rt (Left total/Right total) and strong -1 dB crossfeed is used. So, crossfeeding makes multichannel sound beneficial with headphones, not only with loudspeakers.

Actually people who prefer loudspeakers should really love crossfeeding because it makes headphone sound similar to loudspeaker sound (in respect of sound image). Loudspeaker sound is ALWAYS crossfed (strongly) acoustically.

I have nothing against people who listen to loudspeakers mainly/only, but if you listen with headphones, crossfeed!

Listening without crossfeed doesn't spoil the music in any way. So don't complain.

Quote from: Henk on March 30, 2014, 04:36:21 AM
Listening without crossfeed doesn't spoil the music in any way. So don't complain.

I'm not complaining. I am educating.  ;)

Quote from: DavidW on March 29, 2014, 09:25:18 AM
Is that the one true scotsman fallacy?  You define high-end headphone amps as the headphone amps that don't include cross feed?  Meier, Headroom and FiiO all include cross feed and they encompass the range from high end to midrange to entry level.

It does have that smell. :) But that's only because HiFi is such a nebulous and ill-defined term that means radically different things to different people. So, let's just take a completely arbitrary cut-off point of $1000, and consider the heaphone amps above this point to be 'high-end' (in ambition at least). There are very few examples of any of these being provided with cross-feed, even as an optional extra. Yet, these amplifiers are often built by people who have been in the headphone business for a long time and are quite aware of the effect of cross-feed. Yet, they don't provide this feature and neither do their customers (usually also people with some experience in headphone listening) seem to demand it. From this I extrapolate, rightly or wrongly, that my own feelings towards cross-feed are apparently shared by quite a few others with enough experience to make a well-judged decision in this matter.

One exception to this rule did pop into my head today, and that's the SPL Phonitor. Which is quite an interesting exception, because it has the most elaborate implementation of cross-feed I've ever seen. Unfortunately, although I've heard the Phonitor I haven't had the chance to play around with this feature yet, so I don't know how it performs in that case.

What lies at the heart of my opinion on cross-feed is that I had kind of a reverse Aha-experience compared to 71dB. When I first started out listening to heapdhones I started out listening with cross-feed switched on, because initially it did sound easier on the ears (cross-feed was on a Meier Corda Opera amp, a former flagship that has one of the more advanced implementations of Meier's cross-feed). It was only after some time (months? years?) that I tried listening with cross-feed switched off. The result was a revelation to me: no more strangely diffuse tunnel-vision soundstage. No more masking of detail, that was actually one of the main attractions of headphone listening.

On a sidenote, I did just realise that all my current favourite heapdhones have angled drivers. This probably goes a little way towards explaining why I have no problem hearing a coherent soundstage without cross-feed. The rest, I feel, is adaptation. Your brain learns to adapt to correctly process the sound information as relayed by headphones.

So that is actual my main point from my first reaction: cross-feed may offer benefits to some people, but it's hardly essential for a pleasant listening experience.

Quote from: 71 dB on March 29, 2014, 09:17:48 AM
Crossfeed makes the soundstage narrower and that's good because without crossfeeding most of the sound comes from your shoulders near your ears and that is simply wrong. Crossfeeding "bends" the sound forward, away form your ears were it belongs. If you get "evenly distributed 'headstage'" without crossfeed, your recordings are strangely headphone optimized. Mine aren't, because most of them are made for louspeakers without much consideration of headphones.

But this is precisely one the effects I don't like about cross-feed. It reduces the soundstage way too much in most implementations I've heard.

Quote from: 71 dB on March 29, 2014, 09:17:48 AM
Full-spectrum sound waves? 20-20000 Hz? Well, some loudspeakers do that. So do some headphones. Crossfeeding has nothing to do with this.

What I tried to say is that feeding two different electrical signals into each other, causing some cancellation effect, is different from the cancellations you get through the interaction of the sound waves produced by two loudspeakers reproducing a stereo recording (next to room effects). At least, it's the only explanation I can think of for the significant reduction in sound quality I experience from cross-feed.

Quote from: 71 dB on March 29, 2014, 09:17:48 AM
Nothing magical about it really. Detail hidden by spatial distortion is revealed when spatial distortion is removed. It's logical. I have many schematics of different kind of crossfeeders because I like designing and constructing them. The smallest one is for my iPod (just a 0.56 mH coil and resitor between left and right channel - works very nicely considering the extreme simplicity), but here's the schematics for my current headphone adapter with 6 crossfeed levels:

Thank you very much for your explanations and the schematics. I might just try and build it if I can find some time. Especially the prospect of being able to apply a mild cross-feed in a hardware implementation is something I would still like the experiment with.

Quote from: 71 dB on March 29, 2014, 01:55:01 PM
I take it you ask me?

No, not only you. I meant every poster who didn't respond to OP's query and instead kept on this, facts based on opinions, discussion/argument. Very disrespectful and against forum etiquette.

I was thinking about getting a Schiit Magni for my Sen 650s.  I'm using the headphone jack of my Bryston b-60 right now.  Very smooth, but lacking in deep bass.  I also have a Musical Fidelity V-Can, but while it has the deep bass, it has too much gain, so that the volume is too loud at the sub-optimal low position of the pot.  It's also somewhat edgy sounding.

http://schiit.com/products/magni

Quote from: G. String on March 30, 2014, 10:37:38 AM
No, not only you. I meant every poster who didn't respond to OP's query and instead kept on this, facts based on opinions, discussion/argument. Very disrespectful and against forum etiquette.

Don't be rude.  It is not against forum etiquette to discuss the full nature of the topic at hand.  See http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,5.0.html (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,5.0.html) and to quote from the forum guidelines "By all means, discuss and argue the topic at hand, but do not make personal attacks, belittle, make fun of, or insult another member."

We are not lobbing insults at each other, we are having a spirited discussion relating to factors that have an impact on speakers and headphones.  And just because you created a discussion does not mean that you own it.  You need to respect us and our right to enjoy the conversation wherever it takes us.

I recommended several headphones to you, I've also recommended one pair of speakers in previous posts.  To answer your second question, I prefer slightly warmer than neutral.

Quote from: Drosera on March 30, 2014, 10:02:49 AM
So that is actual my main point from my first reaction: cross-feed may offer benefits to some people, but it's hardly essential for a pleasant listening experience.

Thanks for that nuanced elaboration on your previous post.  I think that we are on the same page.  BTW angled drivers give depth (but not width) to the sound field but don't overcome the inherent problem that the recording is not binaural.

Quote from: Daverz on March 30, 2014, 11:14:39 AM
I was thinking about getting a Schiit Magni for my Sen 650s.  I'm using the headphone jack of my Bryston b-60 right now.  Very smooth, but lacking in deep bass.  I also have a Musical Fidelity V-Can, but while it has the deep bass, it has too much gain, so that the volume is too loud at the sub-optimal low position of the pot.  It's also somewhat edgy sounding.

http://schiit.com/products/magni

That Magni looks like an insane deal!  How did you find out about those!?  I can see connecting a cd player up to it given the rca inputs, but how would you connect a laptop to it?  Are you using an external dac?  Or not an issue?

Quote from: DavidW on March 30, 2014, 11:49:33 AM
That Magni looks like an insane deal!  How did you find out about those!?  I can see connecting a cd player up to it given the rca inputs, but how would you connect a laptop to it?  Are you using an external dac?  Or not an issue?

Schiit also makes a $99 DAC (http://schiit.com/products/modi). I'm thinking of getting the two as a combo package, also. But this would be my first foray into any sort of fancy audio equipment, aside from my headphones (Audio Technica ATH M50), so I don't know what else would be needed, or what difference it really does make in sound quality. Right now I just stick the headphones straight into the laptop jack.

Todd has had good experiences with Schiit (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,17746.msg478333.html#msg478333).

P.S. Glad this thread has been unlocked.

Quote from: DavidW on March 30, 2014, 11:49:33 AM
That Magni looks like an insane deal!  How did you find out about those!?  I can see connecting a cd player up to it given the rca inputs, but how would you connect a laptop to it?  Are you using an external dac?  Or not an issue?

You must have missed all the Schiity hype.

It's meant to go with the companion USB DAC or similar.  I use a Squeezebox and an outboard DAC with a coaxial cable.

Nice!  I'll have to put it on a wishlist.  Especially after buying $100 of Wagner I think I'm done with audio purchases for the time being.

Quote from: Drosera on March 30, 2014, 10:02:49 AM
What lies at the heart of my opinion on cross-feed is that I had kind of a reverse Aha-experience compared to 71dB. When I first started out listening to heapdhones I started out listening with cross-feed switched on, because initially it did sound easier on the ears (cross-feed was on a Meier Corda Opera amp, a former flagship that has one of the more advanced implementations of Meier's cross-feed). It was only after some time (months? years?) that I tried listening with cross-feed switched off. The result was a revelation to me: no more strangely diffuse tunnel-vision soundstage. No more masking of detail, that was actually one of the main attractions of headphone listening.

Some recordings sound better crossfeed off (but they are rare). Many recordings have so "wide" stereo image, that crossfeeding is a must. If you get "tunnelvision" you are crossfeeding too much. The aim is to get over 100 % stereo to 100 % stereo. The closer you get the better.  Most recordings are over 100 % stereo, because if they where 100 % stereo they would sound narrow with loudspeakers due to acoustic crossfeeding.

I think your revelation was about having a "cool" change + the recording you where listening to while putting crossfeed of didn't contain strong spatial distortion.

Quote from: Drosera on March 30, 2014, 10:02:49 AMOn a sidenote, I did just realise that all my current favourite heapdhones have angled drivers. This probably goes a little way towards explaining why I have no problem hearing a coherent soundstage without cross-feed. The rest, I feel, is adaptation. Your brain learns to adapt to correctly process the sound information as relayed by headphones.

There is always adaptation, but removing spatial distortion is still wise. Otherwise we could adapt to the crappiest audio gear on the planet and be happy.  ;D

Quote from: Drosera on March 30, 2014, 10:02:49 AMSo that is actual my main point from my first reaction: cross-feed may offer benefits to some people, but it's hardly essential for a pleasant listening experience.

To me crossfeed is a must. The years before I used crossfeeding were "wasted time" compared to what headphone listening is today to me. Science of human hearing also supports crossfeeding. All sounds we hear around us are always acoustically crossfeeded. Why should headphones make an exception? In my opinion people who prefer uncrossfed headphone sound are after special effects = spatial distortion rather than natural sound.

Quote from: Drosera on March 30, 2014, 10:02:49 AMBut this is precisely one the effects I don't like about cross-feed. It reduces the soundstage way too much in most implementations I've heard.

So the width of soundstage is everything? Anticrossfeeding would increase soundstage. I prefer natural sound that happens in width and deep enough "space". No need for miles width soundstage. Music halls are much narrorer than that, and no orchestra plays on our shoulders! They play far in front of us. Crossfeeding bends the soundstage closer to that. Uncrossfed sound is wide for sure, but its also "near". I don't understand who likes that.

Quote from: Drosera on March 30, 2014, 10:02:49 AMWhat I tried to say is that feeding two different electrical signals into each other, causing some cancellation effect, is different from the cancellations you get through the interaction of the sound waves produced by two loudspeakers reproducing a stereo recording (next to room effects). At least, it's the only explanation I can think of for the significant reduction in sound quality I experience from cross-feed.

Some cancellation (also adding) happens in both cases but yes, there are differencies. With headphones you lack the acoustics of your room (and that should be a plus).

Quote from: Drosera on March 30, 2014, 10:02:49 AMThank you very much for your explanations and the schematics. I might just try and build it if I can find some time. Especially the prospect of being able to apply a mild cross-feed in a hardware implementation is something I would still like the experiment with.

Perhaps weak -10 dB crossfeed is your thing (you don't listen to King Crimson or other harsh stereo albums?). It's not like you must listen to everything crossfed. Recordings are different and therefor it's good the have a choice: off, weak, medium and strong... ...in my experience nearly all recordings benefit from crossfeeding. So, it's essential.

Moderators, please move this thread to the Diner. Thanks.

I have a pair of Shure 840s, but am not that happy with their sound.  I would like to upgrade to the Sennheiser HD 598 (which I saw several people hear swear by), or, perhaps, the Sennheiser HD 650s. Has anybody compared the two?

I like neutral but don't like cold, and therefore found that having a touch of warm tube sound in the chain goes a long way to satisfy my ears (and oh, the three-dimensionality it brings!).

Quote from: Baklavaboy on April 03, 2014, 03:41:10 AM
I have a pair of Shure 840s, but am not that happy with their sound.  I would like to upgrade to the Sennheiser HD 598 (which I saw several people hear swear by), or, perhaps, the Sennheiser HD 650s. Has anybody compared the two?

Haven't heard the HD 650s, but I would opt out for the 598s unless you really want to pay more money. :) I can't imagine much differences between these two headphones.

Quote from: Baklavaboy on April 03, 2014, 03:41:10 AM
I have a pair of Shure 840s, but am not that happy with their sound.  I would like to upgrade to the Sennheiser HD 598 (which I saw several people hear swear by), or, perhaps, the Sennheiser HD 650s. Has anybody compared the two?

Do you use an amp? If not, the decision is easy - 598.

Quote from: Baklavaboy on April 03, 2014, 03:41:10 AM
I have a pair of Shure 840s, but am not that happy with their sound.  I would like to upgrade to the Sennheiser HD 598 (which I saw several people hear swear by), or, perhaps, the Sennheiser HD 650s. Has anybody compared the two?

The 650s sound better, they are warm and dark but very detailed.  They have an exceptionally deep sound stage too... but they are hard to drive.  The 598s have a slight bump in the upper mids, recessed treble and are also warm.  They are not as hard to drive as the 650s.  The 598s are not as detailed as the 650s, but the difference is subtle.  Most of what I hear between the two is tonal quality. 

The build quality on the 650s is far superior.  Series 6 cans and upwards use better materials, and are not as fragile as the series 5 cans which are prone to headband cracking.

Quote from: mc ukrneal on April 03, 2014, 05:46:28 AM
Do you use an amp? If not, the decision is easy - 598.

Is there a significant difference between 598 with/without amp? I have headphones I'm satisfied with (ATH-M50s) but I don't know how significant the change in sound quality would be if I invested in amp+DAC.

I have what are supposed to be decent headphones but if the cord rubs against clothing or whatever I can hear it scraping through the speakers. URGH!

Quote from: Brian on April 03, 2014, 06:07:56 AM
Is there a significant difference between 598 with/without amp? I have headphones I'm satisfied with (ATH-M50s) but I don't know how significant the change in sound quality would be if I invested in amp+DAC.

In my opinion, no, but this is an area where people disagree. As DavidW already mentioned, the 650 is harder to drive, so you won't get the full impact without an amp. The 598, being easier to drive, shows much less of a difference, and I think most people would be quite happy with how it sounds without an amp. But having said that, most headphones benefit with the use of an amp.

Based on the specs I found for your ATH-M50, they look like they will be pretty good without an amp as well. You can try hearing the difference by plugging into your usual source and then comparing by plugging into a stereo system (yours or a that of a friend, or even taking it to an electronics store). If you don't hear any/much of a difference, you don't need one. The only advice I can give you is to try and hear for yourself (and then decide), because you will find opinions from all extremes.

Quote from: Brian on April 03, 2014, 06:07:56 AM
Is there a significant difference between 598 with/without amp? I have headphones I'm satisfied with (ATH-M50s) but I don't know how significant the change in sound quality would be if I invested in amp+DAC.

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).

fyi Brian if you can handle some math, I can give you a formula that you can use to calculate the necessary rms voltage to drive any pair of headphones.  Then you can solve for what your source provides and know if you need an amp or not.

Sennheiser HD-598, which is my primary headphone at the moment has excellent imaging. The sound is more forward and less left/right. With proper crossfeeding the result is yummy! HD-650 is an older model, and has more of that left/right imaging to my understanding, but I haven't heard it. My older headphone was HD-580 (similar sound philosophy)

HD-598 is perhaps easy to drive, but it really needs low output impedance! Audio amps typically have far too high output impedance for this headphone. HD-598's impedance changes between about 60 and 275 ohms as a function of frequency. At 100 Hz is the impedance peak. Low output impedance (I'd say 10 ohms at most) is needed to keep the frequency response flat and damping factor high. The headphone output impedance of NAD 302 amplifier is 220 ohms. If we connect HD-598 to this amp, this happens:

L_min = 20*log10(60/(60+220)) = -13.4 dB
L_max = 20*log10(275/(275+220)) = -5.1 dB

Frequency response error due to high output impedance: L_max - L_min = -5.1 dB + 13.4 dB = 8.3 dB

This means a huge bass boost of about 8 dB around 100 Hz. Totally unacceptable! If the output impedance is 10 ohms, the math goes like this:

L_min = 20*log10(60/(60+10)) = -1.3 dB
L_max = 20*log10(275/(275+10)) = -0.3 dB

Frequency response error due to acceptable output impedance: L_max - L_min = -0.3 dB + 1.3 dB = 1 dB

Bass boost of this magnitude is acceptable if not ideal. If the output impedance is only 1 ohm, the frequency response error is only 0.1 dB. That's totally acceptable. Damping factor (headphone impedance/output impedance) should be at least 8. High damping factor means precise, distortion free sound. Low damping factor makes the sound distorted and lousy.

HD-650 isn't as sensitive to output impedance and since it's impedance is higher (300-470 ohms), high damping factor is easier to achieve.

Wow, thanks for all the excellent feedback.  It's a lot to think about.  BTW, when I use my CD player, I'll plug right into my receiver, and when I play off my hard drive, I'll use a headphone amp/Dac.

Just wanted to point out that the iphone has a low output impedance (4.5 Ohms) as do many phones and mp3 players.  Headphone amps typically have less than 1 Ohm impedance. 

Not every amp and avr has a high output impedance.  Basically those that use resistors to step down the voltage from the speaker source will.  There are others that have dedicated circuitry for their headphone outs and output impedance is low.  I noticed that the former tend to have audible noise floors, and the latter tend not to.  So if the headphone jack sounds fine to you on your receiver, I wouldn't be concerned with the non-flat impedance curve.

Quote from: 71 dB on April 03, 2014, 07:22:50 AM
Sennheiser HD-598, which is my primary headphone at the moment has excellent imaging. The sound is more forward and less left/right. With proper crossfeeding the result is yummy! HD-650 is an older model, and has more of that left/right imaging to my understanding, but I haven't heard it. My older headphone was HD-580 (similar sound philosophy)

HD-598 is perhaps easy to drive, but it really needs low output impedance! Audio amps typically have far too high output impedance for this headphone. HD-598's impedance changes between about 60 and 275 ohms as a function of frequency. At 100 Hz is the impedance peak. Low output impedance (I'd say 10 ohms at most) is needed to keep the frequency response flat and damping factor high. The headphone output impedance of NAD 302 amplifier is 220 ohms. If we connect HD-598 to this amp, this happens:

L_min = 20*log10(60/(60+220)) = -13.4 dB
L_max = 20*log10(275/(275+220)) = -5.1 dB

Frequency response error due to high output impedance: L_max - L_min = -5.1 dB + 13.4 dB = 8.3 dB

This means a huge bass boost of about 8 dB around 100 Hz. Totally unacceptable! If the output impedance is 10 ohms, the math goes like this:

L_min = 20*log10(60/(60+10)) = -1.3 dB
L_max = 20*log10(275/(275+10)) = -0.3 dB

Frequency response error due to acceptable output impedance: L_max - L_min = -0.3 dB + 1.3 dB = 1 dB

Bass boost of this magnitude is acceptable if not ideal. If the output impedance is only 1 ohm, the frequency response error is only 0.1 dB. That's totally acceptable. Damping factor (headphone impedance/output impedance) should be at least 8. High damping factor means precise, distortion free sound. Low damping factor makes the sound distorted and lousy.

HD-650 isn't as sensitive to output impedance and since it's impedance is higher (300-470 ohms), high damping factor is easier to achieve.

This post is amazing. Thank you.

So what happens if I use 598 with 32 ohm iPod and my laptop, which has output impedance of 32 ohms, too? Should I use something in between?

Quote from: G. String on April 03, 2014, 10:28:46 AM
So what happens if I use 598 with 32 ohm iPod and my laptop, which has output impedance of 32 ohms, too? Should I use something in between?

20*log(60/(60+32)) = -3.7 dB for Lmin, 20*log(275/(275+32)) = -.96 dB and the difference is 3 dB so it's a little bit off from bass to treble but nothing like 71 dB's example.  You could just use eq, but that bass boost is not a big deal and you might even like it.

The damping factor is another thing, but that is really an audio myth.  Speakers are well damped by design.  You don't really need the ratio of impedances to be greater than or equal to 8... but it wouldn't hurt either.

Quote from: DavidW on April 03, 2014, 06:49:02 AM
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).

I'm afraid I don't have experience with a wide enough range of headphones to answer this properly; they were my first good pair. Bass presence is certainly stronger than what people seem to say about most other pairs.

Quote from: DavidW on April 03, 2014, 08:19:13 AM
Just wanted to point out that the iphone has a low output impedance (4.5 Ohms) as do many phones and mp3 players.  Headphone amps typically have less than 1 Ohm impedance.

Well, 1-2 Ω or even less but cheapers models are around 5 Ω as far as I know. My old iPod Shuffle 512MB has about 2 Ω output impedance (I measured it).

Quote from: DavidW on April 03, 2014, 08:19:13 AMNot every amp and avr has a high output impedance.  Basically those that use resistors to step down the voltage from the speaker source will.  There are others that have dedicated circuitry for their headphone outs and output impedance is low.  I noticed that the former tend to have audible noise floors, and the latter tend not to.  So if the headphone jack sounds fine to you on your receiver, I wouldn't be concerned with the non-flat impedance curve.

The irony is that the more powerful amp the more stepping down is needed, so low power amps have "better" headphone outputs.  :P

There is an easy solution to be done with high output impedance and noise floor. Make an extension cable (buy connectors and few meters of cable) for the headphones (that's a good idea anyway for mobility). Add two 10 Ω resistors inside the cable jack so that the resistors connect left and right signal to ground. Now the headphone "sees" 10 Ω output impedance instead of the higher output impedance (say 220 Ω) of the amplifier. Also, there is a significant drop of signal level, so the noise floor drops too, hopefully completely under hearing threshold. One has to turn the volume up, but that's no problem.

This is a "few bucks trick" and it works. You just need to be able to use soldering iron to solder those resistors and connector jacks to the cable.

Now, if you add a 3,9 mH coil with DC resistant of about 8-10 Ω between left and right channels, you have got an extremely simple crossfeeder that works! Even adding proper delays to the crossfed signals. So, two resistors and one coil with convenient DC resistance soldered into an extension cable

a) lowers output impedance increasing damping factor and making frequency response more flat
b) attenuates  noise floor, making it easily inaudible.
c) crossfeeds the sound all right (but better crossfeeders exist)

If that's not cool and cost effective, I don't know what is!  :)

Quote from: G. String on April 03, 2014, 10:28:46 AM
This post is amazing. Thank you.

So what happens if I use 598 with 32 ohm iPod and my laptop, which has output impedance of 32 ohms, too? Should I use something in between?

Thank you!

Are you sure about 32 Ω? Well, there's a bass boost of almost 3 dB if you do that. That's audible. Also, the damping factor is rather low (60/32 is about  2).

iPod: I believe your iPod has an impedance much lower than 32 Ω. Anyway, maybe you should use a "portable headphone" with it? Like Sennheiser PX 200 II. Sennheiser HD-598 is an indoor headphone with very little isolation.

laptop: why not buying an USB DAC headphone amplifier? Fiio E7 for example?

Quote from: DavidW on April 03, 2014, 11:08:12 AM
The damping factor is another thing, but that is really an audio myth.  Speakers are well damped by design.  You don't really need the ratio of impedances to be greater than or equal to 8... but it wouldn't hurt either.

Myth and myth. It depends on how damped the headphones are mechanically. If mechanical damping is low, the damping must be done on the electrical side. My understanding is that large over ear headphones like HD-598 have low machanical damping and high electrical damping is needed. In my experience damping factor matters. The sound is clearly more controlled when the output impedance is very low compared to high impedances.

small In ear/portable headphones probably have more mechanical damping, so electrical damping factor doesn't matter so much. Sensitivity of the headphones tell about mechanical damping. High sensitivity => low mechanical damping.

Quote from: 71 dB on April 03, 2014, 11:28:55 AM


Are you sure about 32 Ω? Well, there's a bass boost of almost 3 dB if you do that. That's audible. Also, the damping factor is rather low (60/32 is about  2).

iPod: I believe your iPod has an impedance much lower than 32 Ω.

Yes. Almost all iPods are 32
http://support.apple.com/kb/SP572 (http://support.apple.com/kb/SP572).
How should I get rid of that bass boost?

Quote from: G. String on April 03, 2014, 11:52:57 AM
Yes. Almost all iPods are 32
http://support.apple.com/kb/SP572 (http://support.apple.com/kb/SP572).
How should I get rid of that bass boost?

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.

Quote from: 71 dB on April 03, 2014, 12:28:58 PM
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?

Quote from: G. String on April 03, 2014, 01:49:03 PM
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.

Quote from: 71 dB on April 03, 2014, 03:49:07 PM
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?

Quote from: G. String on April 04, 2014, 03:02:20 AM
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.

@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.

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.

Quote from: G. String on April 19, 2014, 07:35:26 AM
@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.

Quote from: 71 dB on April 19, 2014, 01:03:26 PM
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!

Quote from: DavidW on April 03, 2014, 06:49:02 AM
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.

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. :)

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.

Quote from: andolink on June 07, 2014, 07:40:54 AM
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.

Quote from: andolink on June 07, 2014, 07:40:54 AMThanks 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!  8)

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.

Quote from: Baklavaboy on June 07, 2014, 05:13:56 PM
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.

Quote from: DavidW on March 29, 2014, 09:25:18 AMMeier, Headroom and FiiO all include cross feed and they encompass the range from high end to midrange to entry level.

Any recommendations?

Quote from: mc ukrneal on June 07, 2014, 05:25:25 PM
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 8)

Quote from: Baklavaboy on June 07, 2014, 05:13:56 PM
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".  :)

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

Quote from: Jay F on June 07, 2014, 06:10:25 PM
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. 

Quote from: xochitl on June 07, 2014, 11:40:47 PM
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?

Quote from: Pat B on June 08, 2014, 10:51:29 AM
Have you replaced the filters on your ER-4s?

yeah it's not that. i've had multiple cable failures i keep trying to fix and the red/blue pin connector things are so loose i actually super-glued em so i dont end up with the damn things in my hands and the transducers STUCK in my ears when i try to pull em out

they've seen their share of action  ;D

I am definitely in the "natural" camp. And even if my brother (erato) hates headphones, I don't :) I have 2 sets that I use a lot - Sennheiser HD800 and Stax SR-009. Both sound very natural, and both are extremely comfortable. The HD800 are fantastic at recreating the recording space. The instruments have a lot of space around them and sound very natural.
The SR-009 are extremely precise, and really shows all the detail in the recordings. Things you cannot hear on other equipment is quite audible in these headphones. Very pricey, but extremely good.
Both headphones are sometimes criticized for being "bright", but I think this is just another way of saying that they don't colour the sound by emphasizing the bass.

BTW: The HD800 can sound a bit "anemic" without a good amplifier. I use a Woo Audio WA2 with them - a very good combination in my ears (the WA2 is a tube-amp, and this may go against my stand on "natural reproduction" since tubes do color the sound a bit, but who cares when it sounds as good as this :D  )

My speakers are custom made studio monitors built in the late 70s along with Klipsch center and rears and a top of the line Sunfire subwoofer. 5:1 is a huge advantage, even for two channel stereo recordings.

For headphones, I use Oppo PM-1s and I'm pretty satisfied with them. Nice balanced response. Very natural sounding.

Quote from: hopefullytrusting on October 16, 2023, 07:09:02 PMJust got the Beyerdynamic DT 880 Premium Edition Over Ear Stereo Headphones 250 Ohm Bundle.

A most excellent choice, especially if you got any kind of discount. 

I like Beyerdynamic, and wow a thread resurrected from 2014 with a post from "bigshot." :)

Quote from: hopefullytrusting on October 17, 2023, 08:03:41 AMA bit over 200 for all the stuff. I am very interested in the accessories, especially after have read your post about the Asgard, do this is my foray into this world. I use headphones pretty much all the time, might as well begin optimizing them.

Schiit offers some extremely fine, cheap headphone amps.  The Magnis all sound excellent.  (I have three different versions since they are cheap and fun to play with.)  The Heretic would be an excellent budget choice - it's so clean with such perfect measurements.  (I have the earlier Heresy unit.)  Of course, I kind of want the Mjolnir 3, despite its price, not because the price can be justified by sonics, but because of engineering reasons - Class A, true dual mono with two transformers and two chokes, giant heatsinks, lots of caps, etc.  My current day in/day out serious listening headphone amp is the Jotunheim 2.  It pairs nicely with Beyers.

Quote from: Todd on October 17, 2023, 08:16:10 AMSchiit offers some extremely fine, cheap headphone amps.  The Magnis all sound excellent.  (I have three different versions since they are cheap and fun to play with.)  The Heretic would be an excellent budget choice - it's so clean with such perfect measurements.  (I have the earlier Heresy unit.)  Of course, I kind of want the Mjolnir 3, despite its price, not because the price can be justified by sonics, but because of engineering reasons - Class A, true dual mono with two transformers and two chokes, giant heatsinks, lots of caps, etc.  My current day in/day out serious listening headphone amp is the Jotunheim 2.  It pairs nicely with Beyers.

Hope you have better luck than I did with Schitt. I just got a RMA number to send my Schiit Magni+ for (warranty) repair - defective volume control with static/intermittent contact as it is turned. My experience seems to be the exception, since I mostly read that people are happy with them.

Quote from: Spotted Horses on October 17, 2023, 08:20:54 AMHope you have better luck than I did with Schitt. I just got a RMA number to send my Schiit Magni+ for (warranty) repair - defective volume control with static/intermittent contact as it is turned.

I've owned many pieces of their gear, and never had any issues.  This goes back to around 2010-11.

Quote from: hopefullytrusting on October 16, 2023, 07:09:02 PMJust got the Beyerdynamic DT 880 Premium Edition Over Ear Stereo Headphones 250 Ohm Bundle.

8)

An excellent headphone.  But needs some serious amping.  The FiiO K5 Pro is a powerful all in one dac/amp that can drive anything and only costs $150.  Separates will run you at least $200.

Quote from: Spotted Horses on October 17, 2023, 08:20:54 AMHope you have better luck than I did with Schitt. I just got a RMA number to send my Schiit Magni+ for (warranty) repair - defective volume control with static/intermittent contact as it is turned. My experience seems to be the exception, since I mostly read that people are happy with them.

I had Schiit Gungnir Multibit and it stopped working properly after a year or so. Repaired by authorised dealer and happily sold.

Quote from: Todd on October 17, 2023, 08:31:41 AMI've owned many pieces of their gear, and never had any issues.  This goes back to around 2010-11.

It's a data point. In my case they are 1 for 2 (DAC is fine). Looks like I'll be listening though bluetooth for a while.

I'll report on their customer service. The RMA came with an email threatening that if the device isn't received within 7 days the repair will be canceled. That's nice of them.

Quote from: Spotted Horses on October 17, 2023, 11:21:13 AMIt's a data point.

And my experience is a data point.  My life is comprised of many data points, as it turns out. 

As mentioned, the Schiit Asgard 3 is a fine amp and will drive virtually anything you throw at it because it is so powerful.

Quote from: DavidW on October 17, 2023, 09:07:33 AMAn excellent headphone.  But needs some serious amping.  The FiiO K5 Pro is a powerful all in one dac/amp that can drive anything and only costs $150.  Separates will run you at least $200.

And for more choices the Topping DX3pro is $200 dac/amp combo.  I had a bad experience with a defective model from them in the past, but I recognize that it is a reputable brand on par with SMSL, FiiO, Schiit etc.

Quote from: DavidW on October 17, 2023, 01:09:38 PMAnd for more choices the Topping DX3pro is $200 dac/amp combo.  I had a bad experience with a defective model from them in the past, but I recognize that it is a reputable brand on par with SMSL, FiiO, Schiit etc.

  I have a topping DX3pro, and am very happy with it. The physical unit does get surprisingly hot, though.

I simply use a pair of headphones that do the job well on any kind of music (Sennheiser HD-598). My ears are "burnt in" to those cans, so whatever sound signature they have, I am used to it and instead of worrying about if something else would be better (of course there are tons of "better" cans out there), I concentrate on listening to music.

While many are finetuning the frequency response of their headphones with EQ and what not, I use crossfeed to shape the spatiality of recordings mixed for speakers more binaural to suite headphone listening. For some reason I am very allergic to excessive "unnatural" channel separation on headphones and simple crossfeed improves the perceived sound quality often dramatically for me.

Using a lot of more money on Hi-End cans I could probably improve the sound quality, but after the initial joy of greatness my ears would get used to that and the joy would fade away leaving me with a weaker bank account. Sennheiser HD-598 + crossfeed allows me to enjoy music in a way where it is the quality of the recording and music limiting my enjoyment rather than my gear. Wanting better and better all the time is greed. Being contempt with the good you have is happiness. I want to choose wisely if I can.

Quote from: Spotted Horses on October 17, 2023, 11:21:13 AMIt's a data point. In my case they are 1 for 2 (DAC is fine). Looks like I'll be listening though bluetooth for a while.

I'll report on their customer service. The RMA came with an email threatening that if the device isn't received within 7 days the repair will be canceled. That's nice of them.

Ok, I sent the amp by USPS on Wednesday, and tracking said to expect delivery on Friday (today). Hmmm. They are 40 miles away from me, in Valencia, CA. Today tracking says my package is in Kentucky. Not an auspicious start. :(

Quote from: hopefullytrusting on October 20, 2023, 07:54:01 AMJust got my headphones, and they are very fancy, but my current system is not so much, so I need to get a few more things. Lol. Thankfully, Christmas is right around the corner, and I have a solid stopgap. ;D

Did you get the original silver finish or the black finish?

I don't know, today my Sony XM4s sounded particularly good (Don't understand the complaints about breaking parts and the like. I don't think peeps are handling the phones with any kind of decent care). Was streaming Mozart on Apple Music but I don't recall this particular set of tracks sounding as crisp as it did on my morning jaunt. I did switch mobile carriers yesterday because of continued long term drop/low signal issues (T-Mobile). Anyway, until they fall apart my XM4s are my my steady.

Quote from: Spotted Horses on October 20, 2023, 06:57:33 AMOk, I sent the amp by USPS on Wednesday, and tracking said to expect delivery on Friday (today). Hmmm. They are 40 miles away from me, in Valencia, CA. Today tracking says my package is in Kentucky. Not an auspicious start. :(

Sounds like Australia Post. I live on the east coast (Qld) and one parcel I was expecting was coming from 800 kms further south in Sydney. Then it went 3000 kms west to Perth, then back to Sydney then finally to me. Every stop was at least a two day further delay in the journey.

Quote from: Spotted Horses on October 17, 2023, 08:20:54 AMHope you have better luck than I did with Schitt. I just got a RMA number to send my Schiit Magni+ for (warranty) repair - defective volume control with static/intermittent contact as it is turned. My experience seems to be the exception, since I mostly read that people are happy with them.

Just reporting back, I got my Schiit Magni+ back after warranty repair (about 4 day turnaround time, plus shipping) and they have replaced the defective volume control potentiometer. Works find now. :)