Yeah, been reading a few reviews and it sounds like the LCD-X have more natural bass but maybe less detail in the highs than the Fostex? Sounds very close though. And not an insignificant price difference.
Love my LCD-X, they are eye-opening.
1 Like
For music production, Neumann.
1 Like
Hard choice, open backs will sound different, but Iād say if you primarily mix on headphones, maybe save up for a more significant step up like Audeze or something?
2 Likes
yes i tried the audeze, they have good bass but not good heights, the fostex are much better. sennheiser 800s are good at the height but lack in the bass department, so the fostex 909 are best of both worlds (more natural than the 900mk2) - but you need to compare them by yourself because every person hears a bit different
Sorry, I cannot let that comment stand. Itās untrue, for the simple reason that there is no such thing as neutral headphones. And if there is such a mythical beast, the HD600 isnāt it.
Their main disadvantage is a significant bass roll-off that makes them a poor choice for electronic musicā¦ what most people on this forum will be making. Mix on these and you will compensate by bringing up the bass, accentuating any problems that might already exist in the part of the spectrum with the most energy. Bad idea.
I donāt own the HD600, and itās been ages since I heard them. But from my impressions at the time, I would be happy to use them to mix rock, jazz, and most other music. But not dance, techno, electroacoustic, etc. For this I much prefer the AKG K712, which has the same frequency response at 20 Hz that it has at 1k. Whereas the HD600 is 8 or 9 dB down. Not insignificant!
Furthermore, the impulse response of the HD600 at low frequencies is very inaccurate compared with the K712. It simply paints a misleading picture in this range.
On the other hand, the K712 has greater variation in the high frequencies. How this sounds will vary greatly from one listener to another. Which is another reason that there can be no one perfect headphone.
Besides arguing the merits of individual models, I wish to emphasise that any categorical statement about the superiority of a headset is always wrongā¦ unless the function and listening context is taken into account.
So, you say:
This I more or less agree with. I wouldnāt use the HD25 to mix or master. But I would be very happy to use them in the field, as monitoring cans. I am even happier with the DT1350 (in this case I own both models) for that purpose.
1 Like
Sennheiser HD650
Iām using AKG K92. I know thereās probably better cans out there, but these are the best bang for buck I find in the under 100$ range. But comfort is important to me in headphones and Iāve not found anything comfier than AKG
1 Like
Hi Robin,
its nice to have a qualified argument about this 
Well you are right that the HD600 have a rolloff in the bass below 100 Hz. I dont know the curve of the AKG 712, I might look them up in the sonarworks software later (the demo is a good place to see frequency curves of headphones)
neutrality means that the percieved (not measured) loudness of a headphone is similar to some neutral calibrated monitors in a complete diffuse room. You can compare it by ear by using 1/3 octave bands derived of pink noise.: You listen to the band in the room then you turn on the headphones and turn the level of the headphones so that you perceive the same loudness as in the room ā repeat for every frequency band. But this only works between frequencies from 100 Hz to 10 kHz, because its very hard for the human ear to compare the loudness of two signals below or above those frequencies. And in this range the HD 600 are very linear. A complete flat measured frequency response of a Headphone would sound awful, because there are several aspects of the ear and how we hear sound that is near and far away, so the 1/3 octave hearing comparison is the closest thing you can get to āneutral soundā.
I got the tipp of the hd 600 by Tom Ammerman who use them for his 3D Headphone mixes. He did the mastering for the Kraftwerk 3D Album which was nominated for a grammy, so he must have done something right.
Getting the bass level right in the mix is indeed very hard to be done on headphones. the Fostex 909 is good at this and also audeze are quite competent for this. But the bass frequency response of a headphone depends on so many things: Temperature of the cushions, if youre wearing glasses etc. So you shouldnt judge the level by headphones alone.
A subpack comes in handy for this, because it makes you feel the low frequencies in your back. I would also recommend testing and comparing it to a commecial track in a car where you dont have parallel walls and not the problem of room nodes to check the bass level.
Sennheiser HD650 and Subpac S2.
Iāve also owned Audeze LCD-2C and AKG K712 which are both great, but couldnāt get mixes to translate well to my monitors. Whatever I mix on the HD650s sounds pretty much the same on my JBL 305s, so itās easy to switch between headphones and speakers.
2 Likes
As I said, I wouldnāt argue against the HD600 for most uses. People should definitely consider this model. And though I am glad Ammerman did well with them, award-winning albums have also been mixed on complete crap, so this is not proof of anything.
I donāt disagree with any of the facts you present, but have a different interpretation. It may indeed be difficult to judge low frequency levels in headphones. But it is actually much harder to do so in a room. Treating a room for a reasonable bass extension without resonances is something only expensive studios can afford to get right. Most people at home donāt even have a physically large enough space to get the lower modes. So I recommend headphones precisely for the bass end. People will hear stuff they have never heard on their speakers.
I mentioned a specific problem in my last post. Mixing up the bass to compensate for headphone roll-off will only exacerbate any problems that already exist. Again, I am considering here that we are on the Elektronauts forum and people are making electronic music. To my ears, most of this has too much bass energy, because it has been mixed to compensate for lack of same in the transducers.
When I trained as a recording engineer, we always took the mix out to the car. Of course back in the seventies and eighties (and it was in N. America), a lot of music fans had tricked out their mobile sound systems something fierce!
But back to the big picture. Given all the various listening factors you have mentioned, I would prefer to see a recommended list of headphones at different price points, for different uses. I react a bit allergically to any one model being trumpeted as āthe bestā. Can we not leave that to the marketing departments?
Itās more important to learn oneās transducers. And to not be limited to any one set. I use three different headphone models quite regularly. Because, like almost everyone reading this, I have crappy monitors and a bad room.
4 Likes
Good advice.
I think thats a good combination the hd 600, 650 and 660 are pretty close together.
for anyone looking for a cheap model: the mackie mc-250 for 100 euros are also well done.
For mixing, I highly recommend the Ollo HPS S4: https://www.olloaudio.com/i_135_hps-s4-studio-headphones
Iāve been through a ton of different headphones, for mixing and producing with. The Shure SRH1540s served me well, and I still use them often, along with the Focal Spirit Pros, but for making final tweaks and referencing a mix, the Ollos are fantastic. They translate extremely well, and have amazing precision in the lows and low mids, where all other speakers and headphones seem to fail. I catch mix issues on them that Iād miss everywhere else.
1 Like
I notice they say theyāre flat in frequency response but provide no +/- dB information and no graph.
I bought the hifiman he400s (~$200) because they were touted by some reputable reviewers to be the price/performance favorites.
I like the mid-bass definition with these.
Today I just got the status audio cb-1. Ridiculously cheap ($50-70 depending on coupon) for how flat they are is essentially the moral of the story. A friend of mine who just makes a living from composing and mixing loves them! He is a man on the tightest gear budget ever so he doesnāt have to get a day job so he works hard to find value.
With only an hour comparison I love the cb-1ās. I like the stereo width and mids+trebles better on these than the hifiman open backs. Sub bass is about same. My least favorite part of the cb-1 is what I think is a boomy bass-mid bass. But I much prefer them to the hifiman or some super hyped sonys I have.
Hereās the frequency response curves for each:
Hifiman he400s
Status audio cb-1
1 Like
I really like my Focal Spirit Professional, especially for that money!
The Focalās SP are great for monitoring but the build quality has to be the worst Iāve ever encountered. I think they lasted me about 2 years before completely falling apart.
Iām now using DT1990s and my mixes are coming out great, better than trying to produce in my untreated room.
1 Like
Veering of topic a little, does anyone use Sonar Reference Headphone edition? Worth it?
Re Neumann NDH20 ā¦ I have these, and think they are great. I otherwise used DT770 (kept) and DT880ās (sold) which I thought were really detailed, but the Neumannās are in another league.
They sound very similar to my Neumann KH120A monitors (rock solid, detailed, neutral, with plenty of dynamic āpunchā), which was the main reason I bought them, also, I love the design and quality of Neumann gear
2 Likes