[porky_pig_jr]

http://stereotimes.com/Headroom_Total_Airhead.htm

 

[jude]

porky_pig_jr,

Thanks for the link. But how dare that reviewer rip on my beloved Sony MDR-7506's!

 

[Serow]

Yeah, I was going to start a thread in headphone review containing that paragraph, and label it "For Mike Walker."
Then stand way back and cover my virgin eyes...

 

[dhwilkin]

Now that would be a fun rant to read... that StereoTimes guy wouldn't be able to sit down for a week!

 

[SumB]

I agree fully with him.

 

[joelongwood]

Interesting read, Porky............thank you!

From the article:
Quote:

And, as a source of contention with my brother the aspiring audio engineer, I could hear how badly even the Grados beat up on the ubiquitous "studio-reference" Sony MDR-7506. It’s pretty easy to detect the Sony’s lack of midrange definition and bloated bass. The TAH simply made the differences more dramatic. (I always love the opportunity to take a pot shot at the schlock that studio types rely on just because "it’s what everyone uses.")

Mike????????

 

[Mike Walker]

Actually I now fully agree with the reviewer, and prefer the sound of Grado SR-60s to the MDR-7506. LOL!!! Just kidding!

"Bloated" bass with the MDR-7506? Another "bass hater" checks in! Some so called "audiophiles" don't know what to do when they hear REAL bass extension. They're so tied to their (bass-less) electrostatic panels and/or mini-speakers, that when they occasionally hear a product with REAL bass extension, it somehow sounds "wrong". Well the bass of the MDR-7506/V6 is RIGHT, and most everything else is wrong!

Did you expect me to say anything else?

 

[joelongwood]

Quote:

Did you expect me to say anything else?

Nope!

 

[thomas]

From that article, the reveiwer said:

Quote:

I mentioned something to that effect to Tyl Hertzens of HeadRoom, and he replied that I shouldn’t jump to such hasty conclusions. He told me that MP3 decoding is a completely different process than WAV (CD-ROM) or Redbook (CD music) decoding, which results in a more "organic" sound. He went on to say that MP3s with sampling rates in the 300+ kbps range can sound better than CD. Tyl is onto something.

tyll, did you really say somthing like that, and if so, can you please explain this, i'm a bit confused?!?

 

[coolvij]

a bit confused? I'm going crazy here!

all the "benefits" of MP3 sounded like artificacts...that the reviewer was ENJOYING!

 

[jude]

Quote:

Originally posted by Mike Walker Actually I now fully agree with the reviewer, and prefer the sound of Grado SR-60s to the MDR-7506. LOL!!! Just kidding! "Bloated" bass with the MDR-7506? Another "bass hater" checks in! Some so called "audiophiles" don't know what to do when they hear REAL bass extension. They're so tied to their (bass-less) electrostatic panels and/or mini-speakers, that when they occasionally hear a product with REAL bass extension, it somehow sounds "wrong". Well the bass of the MDR-7506/V6 is RIGHT, and most everything else is wrong! Did you expect me to say anything else?

I have to say I'm with Mike on this one. As many of you know (because I've stated it a million times), I used to work in a high end hi-fi store many years ago, and we had some fantastic stuff come through that place. I've auditioned way too much gear to mention, both at the store I worked at, and many other audiophile boutiques, and if you've never heard a system that can truly reproduce bass relatively flat and accurate to 20 Hz to 30 Hz, you'll likely be in for a surprise when you're listening to recordings your familiar with (with material that hits that low) on a system that can do it. My Sennheiser HD-600's do almost everything so very right to my ears, and, yes, even better than my beloved V6's/7506's. But the V6's -- on music that reaches deep -- feeds me things down there my 600's never let me hear.

I'm sure there are 'phones out there that maybe do it better down there than the V6's/7506's, but, limited to the headphones I've listened to so far, I've not heard any 'phones that are more capable down in the lower registers yet.

 

[thomas]

for the record, MP3 does not use 300k sampling rates as that article claims, it uses 44.1khz, just like the the cd's from which the MP3s were made. And since virtually all MP3's are made from CD's, there's no way that they can possibly sound better than the original CD. Unless the reviewer enjoys hearing artifacts as coolvj mentioned. Of course, the reviewer was referring to 320Kb/sec BITRATES, but in those MP3s, 75% of the data is still removed in the encoding process. There is NO way that you can remove data AND improve sound. It is true that MP3 uses a totally different process from CD audio, but MP3s must be decoded back into PCM (redbook) audio before it can be played back.

and then he admits that Quote:

I typically listen at a sampling rate of 128 kbps, which is a pretty good comprise between compression and not

LOL, even the average DumBass knows that 128k is not even close to Cd quality. ANY detail in the orignal recording is replaced by tons of artifacts and flanging.


And then there's the headphones- The SR-60's may sound better to some people due to its colouration, but declaring that it is WAY better than the V6's just shows his bias. Quote:

I always love the opportunity to take a pot shot at the schlock that studio types rely on just because "it’s what everyone uses.")

He seems to be the snobbish audiophile that has very narrow ideas on hifi, and sneers at everyone else. And considering his previous MP3 comments, it seems that he reviews based on what he thinks he's supposed to hear, rather than what he actually hears. Or he's just deaf.

and here's another quote
Quote:

So, even after dropping a month of burger-flipping money, gamers will never realize what their games are capable of....Hedonistic fun…

Aside from that arrogance of his burger-flipping remark, the comment is totally wrong. Computer games definately do not need a high-fi headphone to reveal all the detail. Most use very low sampling rates/bitrates, and even a koss sportapro will reveal everything in a game. (and its added bass is WAY better than grados for this application) The audio is definatly not 'audiophile quality' and becomes very harsh and distorted on a high-fi system. And the TA is hardly ideal for games because of its non-defeatable x-feed. All modern games have extensive 3D HTRF processing already, and any more x-feed would mess up the effect.

BTW, How can you possibly make an objective review on a componant if you've never listened to any other comparable componant. I mean, the average dumbBass that likes the V-700dJ has more experience with comparable products than this guy does with headphone amps.

QUOTE]Bear in mind that this review compares the TAH to standard headphone listening. I have not heard any of the other HeadRoom amps – which can go up to $1500 – so I don’t know how it sounds compared to the higher-priced and presumably better-performing units. But I do know that this amp is a steal at $159. [/QUOTE]

Quote:

I have no basis to compare what TAH is doing for MP3s relative to other headphone amps, but I can tell you that MP3s lost much of their magic without the amp.

and how many times does he refer to his "Quad/Magnepan" system in that review???[

 

[SumB]

Quote:

LOL, even the average DumBass knows that 128k is not even close to Cd quality. ANY detail in the orignal recording is replaced by tons of artifacts and flanging.

I believe that he was referring to playback on his portable mp3 player, most of which aren't even up to typical soundcards in terms of fidelity.


Quote:

And then there's the headphones- The SR-60's may sound better to some people due to its colouration, but declaring that it is WAY better than the V6's just shows his bias.

Thomas have you heard the the V6? It's questionable if most people who recommend them have. One of these headphones is better by a landslide to my ears and it ain't the Sony.

Quote:

And the TA is hardly ideal for games because of its non-defeatable x-feed. All modern games have extensive 3D HTRF processing already, and any more x-feed would mess up the effect.

Actually the processor on the TA can be disabled. It doesn't mess with the HRTF's either, although I prefer to leave it off for better stereo separation.

 

[Mike Walker]

MP3 DOES remove data. But not 75 percent. Not even ten percent of the data necessary to recreate most audio is removed. How can I state that as a FACT? Because I have done "null" testing on files before, and after conversion to mp3. This would be a very interesting test for most mp3 haters to try!

First "rip" a favorite song (digitally!) to your computer's hard drive as an uncompressed .wav file.

Now open it in an audio editing/mp3 compression program like Cool Edit which allows multiple "instances" or "windows" of the program to be opened at once. Highlight the entire file, and invert the polarity/phase (acutlly POLARITY is the correct term for this) of BOTH CHANNELS throughout the entire file. Now save the polarity-inverted .wav as an mp3 file at, say 128kbps...since we can all agree that this bit-rate (NOT sample rate! That IS something completely different!) is not completely "transparent". Close Cool Edit (or your editor) and RE-OPEN the saved .mp3 file. Why do this? Because without closing and re-opening the program, although it's saved as an mp3, the data on the screen (and in your speakers) is still the uncompressed file. We want to reveal the artifacts! And the next couple of steps will let you hear JUST the artifacts, and nothin' else. Interested? Read on!

Now open another "instance" of Cool Edit (or your chosen editor), and open the uncompressed .wav file. Make sure you start at the EXACT beginning of the file (because PERFECT sample-accuracy is critical!) and copy it into the windows clipboard. Now go to the other "instance" of Cool Edit (where the mp3 file is open), start at the EXACT beginning of the file, and "mix paste" the uncompressed file on top of the mp3 file at EXACTLY 100 percent for both channels. This is CRITICAL, as ANY deviation here will completely screw the results. When you do this correctly, note that the waveform almost completely disappears from the window. Why? Because all that's left behind is the DIFFERENCE between the uncompressed .wav file, and the mp3 file. Translation: the only thing left is WHAT MP3 ENCODING REMOVED! It sure as hell ain't "75 percent" is it? You can tell, because there's almot no audio there! Now go ahead...LISTEN to it. What you'll hear is a vague, ghost-like "whispering" type of effect, which may or may not be recognizable as the original song/waveform. You'll MAYBE be able to recognize a word now and then from the VERY faint sound which remains, if you turn your pc's speakers WAY up!

This is quite instructional for people who claim that mp3 removes "massive" amounts of AUDIO (as opposed to data). And it's also an excellent illustration of how damned inefficient cd is at storing audio, since obviously using a data rate that's 1/11th that of cd's retains probably 99 percent of the original sound...and at 128kbps! Now use a higher quality codec, or up the bit-rate to 320kbps (or your favorite rate between 128kbps and 320kbps) and repeat the test. At some point (different with different music and coders) you will hear very nearly NOTHING. Know what that means? Mp3 is removing NOTHING (or very nearly NOTHING) from the original signal. LOL, I know, that's pretty hard for self proclaimed "audiophiles" to stomach. But this reinforces what I preach all the time, REAL science can actually PROVE FALSE much of what audiophiles profess to be GOSPEL! Maybe that's why so many audiophiles RUN from science as fast as their lil' legs can carry them!

(Go ahead, run the test...if you have the software to do it. I DARE YOU!)

Peace, guys!

 

[thomas]

sumb, yes, i have heard the V6's. Some other headphones i've heard are the Grado Sr 60, 80, 125, 225, 325, RS2, Sennheiser 580, Hd600, 545, 495, 490, 25 Sony e888, 838, streetstyle, V500, V600, V700dj, V6, V7506, Cd1700, cd480, AKG 240Df, Denon Ah750, 850, Koss sportapro, r10, td61, td65, r80, r100, A200, and none of these headphones are as good as the V6s in terms of DEEP bass response. As i said, i personally prefer the Grado SR-60's over the V6's, but that's because of their musical colouration. They have a beutiful midrange that is unrivaled in that price class. However, they are not WAY better than them as that reviewer claims. I'd say they are EQUAL, just different. THE v6's blow them away in terms of bass response, and overal neutrality. And those qualities are what's important for studio monitoring, way more important than "musicality". If you mixed a recording with cheep grados, it would sound like crap if played back on anything else.

ok, i didn't know you can disable the xfeed on the airhead. But if it was left on, it certainly would mess up the HTRFs. HTRFs work by simulating the interaural delays and xfeed levels (plus tonal changes sounds located in different loacations) of the sounds. If you add more xfeed and interaural delays, it would mess up the carefully calculated settings.

Mike, i know that the amount of "audio" removed is minimal after MP3 compression/decompression. I was referring to percentages based strictly on datarates, which i guess is misleading. But my point is that COMPRESSING audio does not IMPROVE the sound. It makes the files smaller, thats it. And anyone that has listened to 128k/sec mp3's would reconize that the following comment is pure BS

Quote:

For example, with the high resolution capabilities of the TAH and Sennheiser or Grado, I heard further into many recordings than I could with my home rig. I perceived the decay of plucked notes on an acoustic guitar and the startling snap of snare drum shots, and could even distinguish among the drums used. And there was no harshness whatsoever. (I typically listen at a sampling rate of 128 kbps, which is a pretty good comprise between compression and not). In terms of its smoothness, it made me think I was listening to quality tube gear. That is a tough feat to pull off: "smooth detail." Furthermore, I was starting to eat my words regarding soundstaging. MP3 is a reflection of CD in the sense that some recordings are imbued with much more ambiance and dimensionality than others. On some MP3s, I could actually hear beyond the soundstage and into the ambiance of the recording venue, which, as I said, is my hi-fi Holy Grail.