[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by some1x ...Are the reviewers experienced with headphone gear?

Definitely not. They have no clue about headphones and not even tested dedicated headphone amps so far. Even worse: The magazine in question is notorious for being industry- and advertiser-oriented (with Sony as one of the main advertisers, BTW) and the least serious of the german magazines. But if someone wants to believe what he believes, even a magazine he doesn't know has to serve for supporting his belief.


Quote:

...What amps, sources, cables, and other equipments were used in the review? Did he use the same amp for all the headphones? Was the k1000 adequately powered? Did he replace the k1000 stock extention cable?

They usually don't list the equipment for just accessories such as headphones.


Quote:

I say K1000 is superior to SA5000

The K 701 anyway!

 

[kartik]

In the end I guess, this thread is coming to a situation of Scissor broken by Rock which is covered by Paper....
It doesn't really matter what anyone else thinks, IMHO, the best way to find the right headphone for you is try it for yourself rather than relying on another man's meat.
This thread would have made more sense in discussing the individual qualities of each of these cans rather than converting it into a dragster race. Enough participants had asserted that in a comparison between an apple and an orange, the ultimate conclusion is that an apple is an apple and not really an orange. Living vicariously, while nice is no replacement for reality. Buy the cans and get ready to discard the cans that aren't right for you.

 

[l_simon_l]

Quote:

Originally Posted by drarthurwells My logic is: A cat is smaller than a dog while a mouse is smaller than a cat, therefore a mouse is smaller than a dog. Results of one German review rated the AKG K1000 as inferior to the Grado RS-1, whicle another German review rated the SA5000 and RS-1 as both equal and better than any dynamic headphone they tested. Conclusion: The SA5000 is better than the K1000.

Well, although I've never heard the SA5000 or K1000, I'm not sure I would draw that conclusion... Headphones are just as much a matter of taste as it is about quality.

I for one think my HD600s are superior to the RS1 in my setup for most of my music... Does that mean the HD600s are superior to the K1000 to? I really doubt it.

 

[drarthurwells]

Quote:

Originally Posted by l_simon_l Well, although I've never heard the SA5000 or K1000, I'm not sure I would draw that conclusion... Headphones are just as much a matter of taste as it is about quality. I for one think my HD600s are superior to the RS1 in my setup for most of my music... Does that mean the HD600s are superior to the K1000 to? I really doubt it.

Some headphones mask problems in a source or amp.

The SA5000 is highly resolving, which means it will shine with a good source and amp but show the warts in a problem source or amp. Other headphones will not reveal these warts and may sound better in a problem system. But in a problem free system, the SA5000 will prove better.

However, your system looks problem free to me.

 

[fewtch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by drarthurwells Some headphones mask problems in a source or amp. The SA5000 is highly resolving, which means it will shine with a good source and amp but show the warts in a problem source or amp. Other headphones will not reveal these warts and may sound better in aproblem system. But in a problem free system, the SA5000 will prove better.

How do you know the SA5000 isn't in fact emphasizing/increasing flaws? The fact that some headphones mask flaws should be a tipoff that some headphones also emphasize and make them worse.

IMO there is no such thing as a "problem" source or amp in the upper end (the stuff we buy around here). Sure, there are problem consumer-grade sources/amps.

P.S. my current favorite headphone (DT880) is one of those that slightly emphasizes system issues... I admit it, no problem. Sounds like the SA5000 may also fall into this category of "hyper-reality" cans. To me the biggest issues are with recordings, not gear. This may exclude them as a consideration for those who listen to musical genres that are primarily recorded poorly (*many*).

 

[RnB180]

Sony tends to tune their higher end audio line to match well with super audio cds, another sony format. SACDs are known for high resolution audio. My guess is they are tuned to reveal the resolution. Might be perceived as emphasizing the top end.

I assume this is why the SA5000s would be considered "resolving"

drathwells, have you tested the sa5000s with a nice sacd player?

 

[aerius]

The SA5000 is "resolving" in the same way as a 3 megapixel picture that's been run through the sharpen filter in Photoshop a few times & had the contrast bumped up. It looks sharp and reveals little details, but compared to a picture from an 8 megapixel camera it's not close to being "hi-res" or "resolving". The 8 megapixel picture would represent a headphone which actually has high resolution, such as a Stax system, Grado PS-1 & HP-1000, or a K340.

 

[Iron_Dreamer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aerius The SA5000 is "resolving" in the same way as a 3 megapixel picture that's been run through the sharpen filter in Photoshop a few times & had the contrast bumped up. It looks sharp and reveals little details, but compared to a picture from an 8 megapixel camera it's not close to being "hi-res" or "resolving". The 8 megapixel picture would represent a headphone which actually has high resolution, such as a Stax system, Grado PS-1 & HP-1000, or a K340.

ROTFL, you think the PS-1 is a more high-resolution headphone than the SA5000? More like a subwooferitis-induced distortion device!

 

[chrisfromalbany]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aerius The SA5000 is "resolving" in the same way as a 3 megapixel picture that's been run through the sharpen filter in Photoshop a few times & had the contrast bumped up. It looks sharp and reveals little details, but compared to a picture from an 8 megapixel camera it's not close to being "hi-res" or "resolving". The 8 megapixel picture would represent a headphone which actually has high resolution, such as a Stax system, Grado PS-1 & HP-1000, or a K340.

not sure what comparison is here but I don't agree.

 

[aerius]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iron_Dreamer ROTFL, you think the PS-1 is a more high-resolution headphone than the SA5000? More like a subwooferitis-induced distortion device!

Significantly better resolution, particularly in terms of instrument harmonics, which I feel the SA5000 fails at. Another member (can't remember the name ATM) said the SA5000 is a very "on-off" headphone, in that details are either shoved in your face or completely deleted, I found that to be very true.

Take a solo violin. The SA5000 shoves the scratchy rosin noise of the bow on the strings in my face, but the harmonics of the violin's body are mostly absent. Lots of string sound, not much body sound. The wood resonance sounds are simply gone. Similar effect with pianos. Very clear hammer striking string sounds, but decay is unnaturally short from the lower midrange on down and once again the sounds of the piano's body are mostly absent. It's good at transients but sucks arse (IMO) at body and decay. It is not tonally complete, a lot of harmonic details from the midrange on down are missing.

PS-1 will get all those missing details which I mentioned above. Yes it will be boomy for people accustomed to the HP-1000 sound of super-tight super-fast bass, which IMO is rather unrealistic. Either of them will resolve more harmonics & low-level details than the SA5000, so yes, they are higher-resolution headphones. Now if you're talking about neutral, well, that's a whole other can of worms.

 

[AsuAmo76]

Quote:

Take a solo violin. The SA5000 shoves the scratchy rosin noise of the bow on the strings in my face, but the harmonics of the violin's body are mostly absent. Lots of string sound, not much body sound. The wood resonance sounds are simply gone. Similar effect with pianos. Very clear hammer striking string sounds, but decay is unnaturally short from the lower midrange on down and once again the sounds of the piano's body are mostly absent. It's good at transients but sucks arse (IMO) at body and decay. It is not tonally complete, a lot of harmonic details from the midrange on down are missing.

Subtle changes in amp can change this. While rolling up opamps yesterday, I could choose from a little bit bright and dry sound to something fuller and rich sound and something in between. Gipsy Kings helped me to make the final decision.

Again, the sound was very close in all these cases. The bottom line - sa5k are very sensitive to setup.

 

[Patu]

I don't know about PS-1 but at least RS-1 gets clearly beaten by SA5000 when we're talking abou resolution.

 

[gsferrari]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aerius Significantly better resolution, particularly in terms of instrument harmonics, which I feel the SA5000 fails at. Another member (can't remember the name ATM) said the SA5000 is a very "on-off" headphone, in that details are either shoved in your face or completely deleted, I found that to be very true

Funny how we all hear differently...I dont agree with any of those statements. The PS1 is resolving!?!?

wow... It is the most colored headphone in the grado lineup if you ask me...a very nice headphone which is unusually mellow compared to the rest of the grato series. Possibly the least resolving of the higher end Grados...which is not really a bad thing. I wouldn't use a 325i with a vinyl setup...even the RS1 will be tricky...I would use the PS1 without hesitation.


Quote:

It is not tonally complete, a lot of harmonic details from the midrange on down are missing.

Think of this in terms of driver design. You want the driver to move with the signal...not on it's own. How do you explain the rapid decay in the case of SA5000 as a "fault" and the lethargic decay in other headphones as a "quality" ?

If it is in the source material - you will hear it with the SA5000.

Listening to Schindlers List theme track portrays the Violin in it's full splendour...with stunning body and emotion...


Quote:

which IMO is rather unrealistic

Key point to note...



Quote:

Either of them will resolve more harmonics & low-level details than the SA5000, so yes, they are higher-resolution headphones

WRONG...

Your example of the Digital Camera. If I made pictures with a PS-1 camera and it blended everything together...making it look smooth and nice - then I would be aerius.

Resolution - defined as the smallest possible feature that can be reproduced accurately. My resolution with an axe is a lot less than the resolution with a fine X-Acto blade...both will probably get the job done in cutting a straw in half - but the X-Acto will have the cleaner cut and require less effort.


Quote:

Now if you're talking about neutral, well, that's a whole other can of worms.

I think resolution and neutrality go hand-in-hand. A bloomy headphone is simply not neutral. How can it be when it is not faithful to the source?!?!?

In the case of a highly damped headphone like the SA5000 - you ABSOLUTELY need an amp with a lot of headroom to overcome the extremely high elasticity of the driver.

Elasticity - ability to retain shape after a force is applied and removed.

 

[aerius]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrisfromalbany not sure what comparison is here but I don't agree.

Resolution, as in how much info can be extracted from the source. To clarify, let me use an example. Suppose I took a landscape picture, and somewhere well off in the background is a flowerbed with tulips & daffodils.

With a 3MP camera, you can see that there's some kind of flowers in the background, but you can't distinguish what they are. Now take that picture and run the sharpen & sharpen edges filter, then boost the contrast & fiddle with brightness, and now those flowers in the background really stand out. But you still can't tell what they are, they all still look rather alike.

Using the 8MP camera, gives more resolution. The flowers won't stand out any more than with the un-edited 3MP picture, but you can now tell that yes, those are indeed tulips and daffodils in that flowerbed.

 

[gsferrari]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aerius Resolution, as in how much info can be extracted from the source

And Neutrality?

So if I have a black and white picture of the same flower bed...is it HIGHLY resolved...but having poor neutrality because the actual image is in color and the reproduced image is in black-and-white?

I like the idea...but it falls flat when we are talking about Audio doesnt it? Resolution and Neutrality almost mean the same thing when we are talking about senses that dont have anything to do with vision...

Take the sense of touch for example - you can touch a smooth surface and a rough surface...there are varying degrees of rough and smooth...

But you cannot touch color because it doesnt mean anything to the sense of touch. Yes you can touch "energy". The object can be hot or cold...

Now in the case of Audio - you can hear the sound...

And what? What else can you do? You can hear how loud or soft it is...you can hear the pitch...harder to define neutrality of sound in any physical term when you have already described resolution.

In any case - SA5000 is one of the most naturally resolving headphones I have ever heard. Grados depend on treble to give you perceived resolution. Sennheiser is another fantastic headphone (the HD650) when it comes to resolving power. But it still falls short of the SA5000s effortless ability to resolve the signal WHICH = Neutrality.