Zanth
SHAman who knew of Head-Fi ten years prior to its existence
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2001
- Posts
- 9,570
- Likes
- 44
[size=medium]REVIEW: Grado Statement 1000 Headphones[/size]
The excitement of a new top-shelf product is rarely without some form of controversy. The sceptics and critics will crawl out of the woodwork to dispute the claims of the “fanboys” and enthusiastic early adopters. When the product is a Grado, at least on this forum, we take the above to the Nth degree. It does seem that no company draws a line between the membership like Grado Labs. One customarily loves a Grado or hates a Grado; there are few that are “content” with the sound and “keep a pair around for kicks.”
Why do Grado products cause such a stir? In the end, it comes down to the sound and many don’t agree with the practice of “tuning” with the ear. John Grado, and his uncle Joseph before him, both “tune” their products so that it sounds the way they want it to sound. That certainly does not mean they avoid using testing systems to objectively measure the item, but in the end, numbers mean little if the sound is not to their liking. I would gather the vast majority of manufacturers don’t produce and market items without listening first, would it be a stretch to say that likely NO manufacturer does that? Perhaps one manufacturer will place greater emphasis on white papers, frequency responses and numbers than their own ear. Not everyone is gifted with a good ear, let alone a golden ear, which apparently Joe and John have been said to possess. If one has a tin ear, then maybe selling something based on excellent specs is the way to go. Regardless, it is a choice and in the end, one is free to buy want they want to buy. This has been John’s motto forever. If you don’t like Grado, buy something that you do like.
However, here comes this new Grado, this apparently different beast altogether. Are they meant for those who have never found a Grado they like? Or are they meant for the hardcore Grado fan? I mean it looks kinda like a Grado doesn’t it. It has that distinctive retro look to it. Simple head-band? Check. Old-style mounts for the cups? Check. Y-connected cord? Check. Though the cups mimic the updated look first introduced with the 325i’s, they are quite similar to the RS-1’s. The length of the cup is the same, and it uses the same cured mahogany as the RS-1’s. So what is different besides the mushroomed outer edge of the chambers? Well, for starters we have our first introduction to the superbowls! Here we see mammoth sized foam pads, significantly larger than the bowls. Oh…and the drivers are new too, but I figured everyone knew that already!
Do these changes effect a sound that is superior to the RS-1’s? To the PS-1’s? How about the HP-1000’s? Are these phones worth $1000? Will they appeal to Grado lovers and those who have chosen a different path? Well, I’ll get to how the phones sound in a moment, but to be sure, answers to these questions are going to be subjective in the end, at least partly. As for all reviews of this type, these are my own personal impressions, based on my analysis and listening with my gear, in my home. So take them for what they are.
My gear is listed in my profile, but for expediency, I’ll list what I used to review the phones:
Source:
Analogue: Michell Gyrodec with the Orbe bearing/platter, SME V arm, Koetsu Black cart
Digital:
Shanling CD T-100 modded a good bunch, tubes were the Bendix Redbank 6385’s.
Amps:
Ear 834 phono stage using Telefunkens
Ear HP4 headphone amp using matched quad of 1944 gold pin Sylvanias
Melos SHA-X, tubes were the CBS/Hytron 7318’s
Grado RA-1
Headphones:
Certainly comparing to some other headphones would be fun right?
Grado RS-1
Grado PS-1
Grado HP-1
Grado HP-2
Alessandro MS-Pro
Cables:
All are gold plated tri-alloys with WBT NeXt Gen connectors.
Music:
Too much to really list, but I have used something from just about every genre.
[size=small]Part I:[/size]
So new Grados, huh? We’ve had a few new pairs over the last 2 years or so. The PS-1’s came on the scene, quietly, as a stand alone model for the German distributor, meant for recording engineers. Todd Green helped some lucky Head-fiers get a hold of a pair. They weren’t cheap, and they were limited to about 200 pairs worldwide. They sound great though! In fact, many sold off their beloved HP-1000’s after hearing a pair. For some detailed impressions you can read my review here.
Then we were introduced to the 325i’s - an upgrade to the top-of-the-line prestige series phone. As I already mentioned, this is the phone that first took on the new look for the exterior of the cups, whereas the PS-1’s were essentially a metal alloy RS-1 in looks. They also sported a new driver. The 325i’s are still in production and will likely remain so for a good while.
Shortly thereafter, we were treated to the limited edition Head-fi exclusive HF-1, again via Todd Green. This phone looked like a 225 but had a mahogany driver housing. It was and still is widely proclaimed to be an improvement over the already much loved 225’s. For those not familiar with the Grado line in its entirety, the 225’s are widely thought to be the “best bang for the buck” in the line. Although the SR60’s may appeal more to the general audience of headphone listeners, the 225’s are firmly set as a standard for those that are interested in something more than a throw around phone for portable gear on the go. Not that there is anything wrong with that. I own a pair of SR60’s and started out with them. They are certainly an excellent “starter” phone and perhaps will be all that one needs, they sound great out of a receiver and out of an mp3 player. They do sound wonderful, but they are rather 2D in presentation and the addition of a headphone amp does not overly affect the sound to the level that an amp has on the 225’s. Yet, the HF-1’s were said to be better AND they were cheaper. Not too bad! Yet, the 325i’s and HF-1’s were only wetting the appetite of some who wanted to listen to something state-of the-art.
In my interview with John Grado last year, many had requested a new statement phone, something that pushed the boundaries of sound and would compete with some of the recent top of the line phones from the likes of Sony (Qualia), Audio Technica (L3000) and Sennheiser (HD650). Though the 325’s and HF-1’s were indeed new and sounded incredible at their price points, they still fell short of the RS-1’s, the current top Grado at the time. The PS-1’s had been discontinued by then, and again, they were never intended for worldwide distribution. So even if some felt they were the best Grado ever made, they were not a production line model and so folks unlucky enough to have missed out on them, had to wait for something else, something new.
Shortly thereafter, John Grado answered those wants and desires, introducing this new phone at the Head-fi National Meet in NYC back in May. Though the 2 pairs demo’d there were only prototypes, Jude could not hide his excitement and wanted to show them off. Jude has been a long-time fan of Grado, having owned the HP-1000’s and HF-1’s (and maybe a 225?) but his heart and been firmly set in the Sennheiser camp with his absolute love for the Big O (HE90/Hev90) and the HD6x0 series. Yet, after a short listen, Jude was so mesmerized he just HAD to show the other Head-fiers what was getting him so excited. That was the start of the craze.
A myriad of questions ensued. Speculation was rampant and at the end of the day the bottom line for most was: when will they be available!
At first, there was a delay because of the packaging. For those that were really eager to get a pair (me included) an option existed that one could opt to receive them, well packaged, in a brown cardboard box. I’m all about the phones; I just wanted them as soon as possible. A good number for folks went the same route. I doubt many were disappointed.
As of right now, I see them listed on the Grado Labs website, so I will assume the packaging bit has been worked out and they are available through the regular distributor/dealer network.
Look and Feel:
When my phones arrived, I was just on my way out to work. I had a meeting the following hour but I did take a quick peak, ripped open the box like the Hulk after a tank snipes a headshot, to inspect the phones (despite my intensity, I was careful) and then well, why not take a minute or so to listen. I fired up my gear, listened and regretted that I had to depart so soon. Yet, what an enticement to return home that evening for what would evolve into a marathon of a night of enjoyment. I barely slept, listening to “just one more song” which quickly turned into “just one more album.” Were they worth the wait? Did they live up to the hype? Well, with only a minute or so with them, I could easily pick out some new aspects to the sound that many were discussing. This indeed was a new Grado sound, but at the same time disctinctly Grado. Might this phone then appeal to the detractors? Yes, I think it will, particularly to those who might have refused to enjoy the Grado sound based on claims of discomfort. There sure wasn’t any discomfort with these new pads! Are these phones ever comfortable! Now, I have medium to small ears I guess, though I always thought myself to be in the medium to near large category, regardless, those with “Dumbo Ears” might have issues with these superbowls, but then, they would have the same issues with any headphone, so it really is moot. What am I getting at? These headphones are comfortable if only because of the way the pads are designed. Are they the most comfortable headphone I have ever used? If they are not, they come second only to the Sony MDR-F1’s, which, for me, are the most comfortable headphone of all time. The Sony R10’s were second but now displaced. However, the F1’s, with their open, light weight design and valour pads, heh, seriously, air on the ears, just weightless and super comfy, but the GS-1k’s are close given the pads rarely even touch the ears! If they never did touch, I would give them the first spot.
Is there anything special about these pads beyond their size? To be sure, I did try them out on a bunch of other Grados (HP-2, HP-1, RS-1, MS-Pro, PS-1, SR-60, Sr-325i) for kicks and I’ll deal with the sonic differences in Part II, but for now, I will say that the size of the pads lends to a unique distribution of the weight. Because the pads force the headband apart, instead of the total force of the headphones directing straight down on the head as is the effect with bowls or flats (and by extension, with most headphones if not all headphones), the force is now distributed slightly outwards as well, effectively dispersing the weight, and making the phones feel lighter than they really are. Can this ever be a bad thing? No not at all, at least not in my opinion. This weight dispersion occurred with every phone I tried them with, which makes complete sense. As a quick note, it was a really nice feeling when using the beefy PS-1’s.
Tech Specs:
Aside from the new pads and the new outer bezel of the cups, the GS-1000’s look very similar to the RS-1’s and in fact, to the entire line of Grado headphones. The new Grado Statements sport the same vented diaphram design as all other Grados save for the now discontinued SR-40 as well as having a wooden air chamber like the Reference series before it. The voice coil and the copper in the cable are both UHPLC taken again from the Reference series. When it comes to wire, at this level of purity you can’t really improve (snake oil aside) so the only alternatives would be to use either silver or some other metal (gold or tri-alloy). Considering copper is a standard and generally accepted to be a good choice in cables (not sure about voice coils but I’ll assume that most are made with copper) then the GS-1000’s could not have bettered what the RS-2’s and RS-1’s already used, which is close to the purest copper available.
The drivers are dynamic, open air design, matched to 0.05 db, the same as the References series but it is not a legacy driver. The GS-1k sports an entirely new, redesigned driver. Folks, this is NOT your RS-1, PS-1 or 325i driver. You don’t believe me? Fine, but I then urge you detractors to take a GS1k and plop flats or bowls on them, and vice versa, do the same with any other Grado. There is simply no way this can be the same driver as any older Grado just based on that this testing method. Now balk at my statement above, which of course is fact, since it has be taken straight from the horses mouth - John Grado! In the end it really does't matter, new or old, they do sound different, better or not, that is subjective, but different for sure.
The stated frequency response is 8-35, 000 Hz, a bit more than the RS-1’s 12-30, 000. Now, given that 8 Hz is in the "feel it not hear it" zonw, which, well, once I get to the force of the bass, it really is a feel it vs. hear it scenario, I'm sure some will love the ratings. As for 35 kHz, unless one is a dolphin or a bat, this is way beyond our hearing, but it may be very important for harmonics. The SPL at 1mV - 98, is the same as the RS-1's. The impedance is the same 32 ohms that all Grados seem to possess yet I will say that some Grados are easier to drive than others, and the GS-1k’s are no exception to this trend. Personally I find the GS-1k's easier to drive than the RS-1's.
Overall, looking at the phones and reading the specs, one can surmise that this can’t be all that different from previous Grados right? Sure the pads are larger, but could that really affect the sound to such a dramatic extent? Okay, so maybe these new drivers do something different, but such a drastic difference as to warrant an upgrade from the RS-1’s? Calling them different through and through? Let’s find out!
Sonic Impressions:
On first opening the package, I was drawn to the massive pads. I call them superbowls; I'm sure others will come up with their own terminology including bagels, so I have read. The placement of the driver far from the ear is quite unique. Perhaps this is what some were trying to do with the Headphile pads which were all the rage?
Larry at Headphile was experimenting with Beyerdynamic pads I think and this must have kept the driver at a similar distance, certainly it was at a greater distance than the bowls would be, sitting on or nearly around the. Once I had them on my head for a few minutes, comparing with the feel of flats and bowls, I had to plug them in!
On first listen, I was taken aback. I don't know if I conceptualized my expectations but whatever they were, they didn't coincide with what I was hearing - at least at first. I don't listen very loudly. Though Grados have this tendency to get people really into the music and thus seemingly tempting them to crank it up! (this happens to me all the time and I have to remind myself that my ears are precious.), I really try to make a concerted effort to keep the volume down so that I can listen for long periods and not have to worry about my hearing. When using the RA-1, I am rarely above 8 o'clock on the dial. When using the Ear HP4 I'm never above 9, usually hovering between 8 and 8:30. Having the dials set the same as when listening with the RS-1's, I plugged in the GS-1k's to find that the sound was very distant. No longer was I sitting on stage, not even in the first row, but instead I was somewhere near the back of the hall, maybe not even in the room. Up the dial went until I had reached a comfortable volume and I had re-entered the venue, somewhere between front-row and mid-hall.
This I feel will be the most striking difference for most on first listen. Initially I thought I would lose out on the impact Grados usually portray. However, as I became acclimated to the sound, I finally fell into a new distinct zone. The impact was certainly there, it was simply different.
Having played various instruments for 20 years or so, mostly clarinet and saxophone, the latter I played semi-professionally to help pay for college in my earlier school days, I am accustomed to the sound of the on-stage experience. The RS-1's were the first headphone that truly put me RIGHT THERE with the performers. Granted, my previous experience with headphones had solely been with the SR-60's which are no slouch in this regard either, yet the RS-1's were simply able to supercede everything the 60's did with grace and poise while excelling in the areas of intimacy, impact, decay and most prominently - more than any headphone ever, including the Sony R10's – tonal accuracy and timbre. No headphone has in my opinion, ever been able to capture the true sound of a woodwind, not like the RS-1's and certainly not that sound as a performer would hear it. The GS-1000's retain the tonal accuracy and timbre but one is no longer among the performers but distinctly a member of the audience. For many, this is going to be a welcomed trait, to others, they will want to experiment with bowls or flats to regain the onstage presence. Whatever the case may be the presentation is unique and definitely will suit some forms of music and/or some albums in particular more than others.
Continuing with the positioning of sound, without a doubt, the new Statements possess an increased soundstage and headstage. When I use these words I use them to express two distinct sound perceptions. The first is the out-of-head sound experience encompassing the entire sound field of the recorded venue. I have always felt that Grados provide excellent sound decay so that if I were listening to a recording done in a church, I could hear the sound travel up up and all the way up or if it was a live outdoor performance, then the sound would trail well off into the distance. These phones do this as well, not necessarily better than any previous Grado, but certainly no worse. What they do do though is project sound from a seemingly greater distance, what I call the headstage. For example, if I were listening to a movie and I heard someone creeping up behind me, with the RS-1's I may perceive the initial sound to be 8 ft back, but with the GS-1's I would hear it more correctly at 15 ft back, if in fact, it was at 15 ft, vs. the 8 ft. Or, when listening to music, particularly if I were using flats, so that I'm onstage with the performers, I felt that the RS-1's gave me that elbow to elbow feel as if I were in tight quarters, on a small stage. With the GS-1's and the superbowls, I'm off the stage now, but perceiving the stage, I couldn't imagine it to be small, but as big as it could sound with headphones, with a very real listening perspective for someone in the audience who will get sound cues from each instrument in their true space-time position. The sound is expansive, large, but never exaggerated. By this I mean that I never feel the headstage is disproportionately large like some headphones project. I feel it is very natural and a true pleasure to listen to. For those that felt that Grados offered a very 2d headstage experience, these demolish that giving an exquisite 3d headstage with great imaging. Here I feel the pads work wonders. The imaging is simply easier to discern, because the sound field is projected outward to a greater degree. Though, if considering a biplanar field, I feel the Y-axis is pretty well the same with either pad, the X and Z axes are the ones that really benefit from the new pads. Again, I feel the notes decay into the background to the same extent yet the sound would have to travel further using smaller cushions because the performers are closed in tighter and upfront in between the ears of the listener. For those who have never performed onstage, these new phones will present a sound they are more familiar with.
Given the pads are much larger and that the drivers are pushed back further from the ears, I was worried that the foam would absorb some frequencies more than others and thereby giving a suck-out in certain areas of the audio band. Now, I may be off here, since I can't measure the phones, but when using the flats, I felt that GS-1k’s had very prominent bass, perhaps even more than the PS-1's. No, let me restate that, with flats or bowls, the GS-1k’s simply possess the most bass I have ever heard out of anything but a cheap pair of Cerwin Vegas. Wait, am I insulting these phones already? No not in the least. What I am trying to convey however, is that these phones don’t work very well with pads other than the stock superbowls, just as John intended them to work. Putting the superbowls back on, the bass is transformed to a very balanced, tight and articulate bass that most will be thrilled with. So either the new pads do absorb some bass or the distance from the ear helps the bass notes expand out more so that once they hit the ear they are properly time-delayed. Either way, I think that the bass on these is exquisite. What some had hoped for in a new Grado phone was the tightness and layering of the HP-1000's in the bass, but with the depth and robustness of the PS-1's. I think these phones present a very nice balance of those wants. The bass exhibits a very strong walloping sound with plenty of snap. The layered bass notes is something to behold, audible way down deep, as low as anthyhing I could throw at it. Synthesized electronica bass? Yes, not a problem. What about some great organ works, Bach perhaps? Sure thing! No worries at all! Hitting a bass drum, or a timpani wakes one up, forcing one to take notice. I've always admired Grados for this experience and the GS-1000’s fall right in line with its predecessors. What is likely going to marvel most is the presentation of texture and detail. I could easily follow bass lines, something very few phones are able to adequately portray. There was never a hint of bass bloat, a "one note" reproduction. I whipped out some electronic music that goes as low as human hearing can listen and I couldn't hear any roll-off. So these new phones don't give up anything to any phone I have experience with except curbing some of the bass prominence, which provides again a more balanced presentation. The WOW! factor comes into play immediately and it has been my experience that those models that really wowed me at first, often irritated me to some degree in the future, whereas those units that caught me off guard by not exposing any one portion of the audio band more prominently than the other, or concentrating on one aspect of sound reproduction than another, always won me over in the long run. I think this is the secret to a musical phone vs. a typical "audiophile" or "hi-fi" sounding phone. Likely this is the reason I love the RS-1's so much. I never feel they exaggerate to a great degree, any one frequency, nor do they exaggerate detail, which I detest. Yet, even though the bass WOWED! me, I, to this day, love to listen to them and I have enough hours on them to call them my own, well broken in, and well loved. The bass is something to behold, outdoing all phones but one in my opinion, and in comparison to this one phone it loses out only in impact, but then, so do all other phones. The phone in question? HP-1000, any model, but more of that in Part II.
The midrange was very familiar sounding. The GS-1000 certainly exhibits the renowned Grado midrange that has made Joseph and John famous. I don't think they have any more detail nor any more magic than their predecessors, but I will say that they resemble the transparency of the RS-1's midrange over the liquid midrange of the PS-1's. I would have to really compare over many long hours using most of my collection to really make a definitive statement regarding which model bested which model. If I had to wager, I would say that there is a three-way tie here. I mean, really, how can you improve on the RS-1's midrange? Fanboyism aside, they already have the best midrange possible for my tastes so if the GS-1000’s can just approximate it if not duplicate it, then they are golden! The GS-1's simply include this, or nearly so, so in my mind, it’s a win win overall. The midrange is a familiar midrange, yet, to be certain, the midrange is sonically presented differently since the mids tend to be more recessed causing what I hear as the major factor in the “mid-hall” sound effect. If the new drivers have accentuated bass and as we shall read shortly, some elevated highs, the midrange is recessed. I’m not indicating an HD-600-like suckout here, but certainly, the audible mid-hall sound is mainly due to the midrange volume level decrease. Still, marvellously enough, all the resolution and detail one could want (or rather I could want) is present in the mids, along with that glorified timbre that is second to none. In fact, I would say that the GS-1k may have a more accurate timbre response since its note decay is faster than the previous Grado flagships, lending to a more proper tone control, less syrup, more authenticity. I like some sweet stuff with my music however, so RS-1’s, you still have a place in my heart
The highs, ah the highs. Treble notes seem to be within the most beloved yet most diffcult to represent spectrum. The detail lovers get their rocks off from accentuated highs but those that have sensitive ears don’t want a burning sensation after 30 seconds of listening, let alone 30 minutes. Some have complained that previous Grados were hot up top. Though I do feel that the SR-325’s are quite forward and the 325i’s , though less so, are still quite forward and sometimes a bit strident, the GS-1000’s (at the levels I listen at) are never fatiguing, never “hot” never urging me to throw off the phones to give my ears a rest. Though sounding exciting, the forward nature over time, would not bode as well with me as the more balanced sound of a more recessed unit. In this regard, the GS-1000's are more balanced than the 325i's and the highs are more natural and inviting. Maybe this is due to the Ear HP4? I can't say for certain though I have never had issues with the HP4 being rolled off up top. Yet, I will say that my Melos is certainly not rolled off and the RA-1 is not laid back in the treble, so for me, at my listening levels, I had no qualms with the highs. They are present, they have bite, but they don't leave my ears ringing or sore after a short while. Before they were broken in, the highs were disproportionately accentuated, but after 100 hours or so of burn in, everything really fell into place in a pretty permanent position. I would say that the phones were pretty well broken in after 50, but certainly after 100 I was not hearing anything new.
I don’t know why I usually can tolerate Grados compared to Audio Technicas or Sony’s or heck, even Sennheisers (HD580,6x0 series) but it is true, I find the highs of Grados to be overall more natural than these companies’ offerings. It has been presented that the frequency curve of the GS-1000’s would resemble a valley or at least a valley-like curve, this as opposed to the more linear sounding HP-1000’s or curves from other manufacturers. I don’t buy based on frequency curves and I would have to dispute any graph that presented a full on valley presentation. I feel the sound is natural, extended, detailed but most importantly NEVER sibilant (poor recording notwithstanding). At times, other phones can get pitchy, and I think this has been a driving factor for many to look at the flats vs. the bowls when they acquire various Grados. The GS-1000’s, with my system, using my various amps, never became sibilant. Now, my amps are not necessary known to be the most neutral (though the RA-1 has been said to be pretty transparent and close to neutral) but I will say that I have not heard sibilance nor any roll-off. There is a smoothness, an ease and naturalness to the highs even if the highs were presented more upfront compared to the mids. Some have proclaimed these phones to be the most natural and neutral Grados ever. I don’t know if I would go this far, but I will say that they are very natural sounding, and fun and enjoyable and balanced and non-fatiguing while remaing very detailed, resolution, timbrally and tonally accurate.
I found that the GS-1000’s are very versatile in terms of amplification, fairing pretty well with the lowly iPod, renowned for its deficiencies in driving low Z phones, while increasing in all areas when driven by decent SS and tube amps. My choice amp at the moment is the Ear HP4, but I have oscillated in that opinion going from Melos to Ear and back again. Some may want to know how the RA-1 performs with this new Grado. Folks, if you hate the RA-1, don’t bother responding, I just don’t care what you think. Nuff said, we all have opinions. For those that enjoy the RA-1 and feel it has a synergy with the RS-1’s then you are in for a real treat! I think that the RA-1 fairs even better with the GS-1k! Perhaps it is based on the mid-hall presentation, but the RA1/GS1k is a very special combo. Sure the headphones cost 3x the price of the RA1, but the action, the music, the joy…it is all there in spades. Since the RA-1 is quite proficient at relaying what the original signal had in store, the GS-1k’s can work their magic and extract every last bit of detail possible. In fact, save for Etymotic 4 series phones, I would say the GS-1000’s are the most resolving headphones I have ever heard (I have not heard the Qualias but they take the R10’s no problem).
With the Melos, a hyrid, one gets more “oomph” and “wallop” in the bass through the lower mids but the highs will take on a more clinical edge as opposed to using the HP4. The Ear resolves as well as anything I have heard to date but is softer in the highs (to my benefit and liking) while being softer in the bass (at least compared with the Melos). What I do love about tubes is that warm midrange glow. The Ear is not a typical tubey tube amp, but it does retain enough tube warmth to leave me smiling. The Melos may well be the hardest hitting amp I have ever heard and the GS-1000’s do benefit from this, as do all Grados, but I have always had a “thing” for the Ear and the wooden Grados and for now, the near perfect midrange presentation of the Ear is what I want the GS-1000’s to relay. The Melos is, in my opinion, best suited for the metal bodied Grados. This seems rather logical since it was designed, afterall, for the HP-1000’s!
Running at about 10 pages, I’m sure many are getting bored so I will stop for now. I’ve taken longer than I would have liked with this review, in terms of time to posting. Work and family obligations have this unreal tendency to fall in line with one’s hobbies. I’m no exception to this rule and so, given the last few months, my ups and downs and the proximate birth of my new child, well, I’ve been occupied. Yet, Part II, the comparative review (GS-1k vs. RS-1, PS-1, MS-Pro, HP1, etc) is forthcoming and won’t take nearly as long to post, ideally within a week or so. The notes are complete, I just need to sneak some time away to write it in a cohesive comprehensible form. Until then, I hope you enjoyed what I have written thus far. Oh and yes apparently I am a Grado fanboy, if not THE Grado fanboy, well according to this site anyway
So if you feel I'm biased, fine, but I have stated I like a plethora of other phones a good deal, just not enough to warrant me spending my money on. Heck I'm even willing to buy R10's to go along with my iPod! Just price that silly thing at $700 and I'm there
[size=x-large]PART II[/size]
[size=medium]INTRODUCTION[/size]
A while ago…no wait, scratch that. A little over a while ago, or heck even a year and a half ago! I had indicated that I wanted to follow up my original review of the GS-1000’s with a comparative review between them and the PS-1’s, RS-1’s, MS-Pro’s and the HP-1000’s. For one reason or another, every time I sat down to write out my notes and get the review finished, something would come up. It has been an odd year, maybe even a really rough one, I suppose I could better comment on that at the end of my life, but for now, it has been one of the roughest of my life and so a lot of my extracurricular activities were put on hold. This included participating on Head-fi for long stints as well as writing reviews. The flip side to the mayhem was that one of the only ways I was able to stay calm and sane was by listening to headphones. The craziest bit about that is I went MONTHS without listening to my main setup. I was mainly listening to my iPod and the Westone UM2’s. One would think that if listening to music (particularly via my main setup) was really relaxing, a soothing getaway from the muck, why didn’t I do that more? Who knows, one of those “bad ideas” I guess. Or I just didn’t think of it, or whatever. Anyhow, back in October I started to listen again gradually and the last month or so has been non-stop. With this being the end of the year, all sorts of magazines are releasing their “best of” issues and I’m lost in a sea of new music I want to check out.
So with my listening kicked back up to a level I rather respect, I have once again felt the urge to write a review. I have a few things on the back burner, but I thought this one would be the one I would get out the door first, mainly because I had mentioned I would write it and finish it, time and time again. So for better or for worse…here it is:
[size=small]SCORING[/size]
To start I’m going to provide a little scoring scale which I will use throughout the review to grade different aspects of the headphones, either their build or the sound. Please remember this is a personal review - my opinion on how the phones sound and although I’m trying to throw out some objectivity it is more to aid folks in getting a quick picture on how I hear things. For the purpose of this review then, a number will be asigned to each headphone after a certain section has been written. Although I listened to 7 headphones (three different HP-1000’s over the year) I used an HP-2 with the ultrawide bandwidth cable the most, so I am going to use it as the benchmark for this review. Therefore, the scale runs from 5-1, 5 being best. If a feel there is no difference or such a small difference between phones, I’ll assign the same number to those phones and drop the lower number. 5 4 4 2 1 for instance, if I felt two phones tied for second place.
[size=small]UNITS REVIEWED[/size]
I’ve written a similar style of review back when I compared some HP-1000’s to the RS-1’s and later when I compared the PS-1’s to the HP-1000’s and the RS-1’s. The PS-1’s I used for this review are my own and are well listened to (20x as many hours as compared to the PS-1’s I used in my former review). The RS-1’s used are the same wonderful ancient pair, dark wood, gold lettering, brown headband which once had a box…but that has since left my possession. The HP-1000’s are different, though I have yet to encounter an HP-1000 that didn’t have a gazillion hours on them. After 1.5 years, the GS-1000’s too are well worked in, they have been my main headphone since I received them and I’d estimate 1200-1400 hours on them as a minimum. The MS-Pro’s used were a well broken-in pair used at a local attic studio. These were the toughest to source out for a lengthy audition but thankfully I was procure a pair for nearly half a year of listening.
[size=small]BUILD QUALITY, COMFORT, LOOK AND FEEL[/size]
To start off, let’s examine the look and feel of each headphone. All Grados share similarities to each other, owing to the retro-style of WWI/II era headphones. They are all vented diaphram, open-air dynamic headphones matched to .05 db. The phones with ¼” plugs and a Y-connected cable. They all come with foam ear cushions, with each model coming stock with a different style of ear pad. Some claim the pads are abrassive but as the user listens more and more, the oil from the ear softens the pads and for many this improves the comfort level dramatically. The headphones sit on the ear and are mostly supraaural save for the GS-1000’s using the large “superbowls” or if one has tiny ears, the bowls may in fact be circumaural as well. The headband is flexible enough to be gently bent to suit the user’s headsize. I’ve always found Grados to be very comfortable, favouring their ergonomics over other brands that tend to “clamp” the head.
HP-1000: Without writing anything more, one could assume, and likely should assume that the HP-1000 will get the 5 on build quality. Without a doubt, the HP-1000 is the best built of these Grados and well, the best Grado and likely the best headphone built ever. Though the overall look and feel of the Grados has been preserved since the introduction of the HP-1000’s, there is no doubt that the HP-2 in particular is not merely a pro-model capable of taking daily abuse in a studio but is also capable of outlasting mankind after an ELE (extinction level event). Not just defensive in nature, an HP-2 could easily be used to fend off a shady character lurking in the shadows. “The Grado HP-2, it’s not just a headphone! It could save your life!”
With its strong metal cups, metal screws that tighten the metal clamps to the metal poles which are attached to the metal headband, this all-METAL Grado is built like a tank. The leather headband is a nice touch but some have found that the leather is a bit thin and weathered by the time they get their hands on one (unless by chance lightning has struck and they sourced out a NM->M pair). Hirsch may have been the first to source out some old military headbands and modified his to have a better cushioning. The nice thing is that this mod was reversable because this add-on snapped around the current headband.
These headphones came with flat pads and a few varities of Y connected cables ending in a 1/4” plug. The first wire used was a standard copper wire which Joseph later upgrading to the Ultrawide bandwidth high purity variety.
As most know the HP-1000’s come in three versions with two really being distinctive. About 1000 total produced, only about 50 were HP-3’s. The rest were split nearly evenly between HP-1’s and 2.’s. The first is the HP-1 with polarity switches on each cup and the HP-2 sans polarity switches. In the early days of Head-fi, it seemed everyone raced after HP-1’s because they were said to be rarer than the other HP-1000’s and had the cool switches. As time went on, and folks had the opportunity to compare between HP-1’s and 2’s, many felt the HP-2’s were superior because they lacked the switches. There was a clearer sound to them or whathaveyou. Beyond the benefits of sound which may or may not be subjective, the switches are a possible point of failure and therefore the nod goes to the HP-2’s in terms of superior build. Since the HP-3’s are just HP-2’s without the same level of driver matching, of the three versions, the HP-2’s win out. I can’t seem to source out the frequency response of the HP-1000’s but I couldn’t for the life of me phathom something less than 20 Hz to 20 kHz. They are 40 ohms and the most current-demanding headphone I know of.
PS-1: The next most durable Grado is the PS-1 (and by extension the Freesystems since many a Freesystems became a PS1). The PS-1 is a cross between an RS-1/MSPro and the HP-1000. The cups are a metal alloy which may or may not be the same or as strong as the HP-1000’s. The cups are attached to a metal rod that is attached to the headband via a plastic clamp instead of a metal one with a screw to tighten and hold it in place. The leather handband is thicker than that on an HP-1000 offering more comfort which is a good thing because the PS-1’s are one of if not the heaviest headphones of the last 30 years. The cups are larger than those of the HP-1000’s extending out 3+ cm more than the HP-1000’s. The PS-1’s are tough, built to last and are John’s answer to the pro-audio market. These headphones were a special run for the German Grado distributor meant for studios around Germany. They are the rarest of the Grados and perhaps the rarest of any of the well-respected headphones and came stock with bowl pads along with the same signature Grado Y-style cable and UHPLC copper connecting cord. This copper has been rumored to be better than any wire used on an HP-1000. They are rated at 32 ohms and have a likely frequency response of at least 12 Hz to 30 kHz, maybe even 8-35. Though Freesystems was rated at 20 Hz to 20 kHz.
RS-1/MS-Pro: Representing John Grado’s first endevor at a reference headphone are the RS-1’s. Since the MS-Pro’s are essentially a tweaked-driver version of the RS-1’s, custom made for Alessandro, I’ll lop them together for the purpose of this section. The form factor of these phones is identical to that of the PS-1’s. The only difference besides the drivers is the cup material. The chambers for the RS-1’s and MS-Pro’s are made of Mahagony using an intricate curing process. This leads to a very light weight which many have enjoyed. The use UHPLC copper for the cable and used to come stock with flat pads, now they come with bowl pads, but flats are still available from our trusty Grado-loving Head-fi sponsor Todd Green at TTVJ, Todd The Vinyl Junkie They are rated at 32 ohms, and have a frequency response of 12 Hz to 30 kHz.
GS-1000’s: The current flagship and first Statement headphone, the GS-1000’s follow closely from the design of the RS-1’s, sporting the same cup material, but offering up a new look that more closely resembles the look of the recently released 325i’s. Instead of a straight out barrel/cylinder, the cups end it what some have called a mushroom head. This new design is merely cosmetic in nature as the inner chambers are pretty well the same dimensions as the RS-1’s. Besides a new driver, the GS-1000’s are the first Grado to come with the new superbowl-sized pads - MASSIVE cushions that fit entirely around the ear and thus the first true circumaural headphone from Grado. This new style also increases the comfort level of the phones by a large margin over any of the other headphones, and making these headphones feel even lighter than the RS-1’s. With the pads braced up against the sides of the head, it takes some of the downward force from the top of the head. Nice touch. Folks can now officially stop complaing about uncomfortable Grados
They are rated at 32 ohms and have a frequency response of 8 Hz to 35 kHz.
[size=small]Summary Scores:[/size]
[size=small]Build Quality:[/size]
5 HP-1000’s. Like anyone doubted this! No elaboration necessary.
4 PS-1’s. John’s best stab at meeting the standards of the HP-1000’s. A current Grado made to those specs would cost about the current going rate of HP-1000’s)
3 A three-way tie between the other phones. They are a more delicate trio, meant for the home user, not meant to be tossed around in a studio. Leave that to the heavy lifters above
[size=small]Comfort:[/size]
5 GS-1000’s. With their massive pads and light-weight wooden cups, they make for a comfortable marathon listening session.
4 RS-1's/MS-Pros. Though not as comfortable as their new big little brother, unless they too sport the superbowls, the RS-1’s and MS Pro’s with flats are the next best in terms of all around comfort for these ears. Lightweight and flexible, another great design for long listening sessions.
2 PS-1’s. Coming stock with bowls which are not as comfortable to me as flats (but are necessary in terms of sound) as well as the mighty heft of the phones makes them a good deal less comfortable than their wooden brothers, though since the headband is easily bent, one can alleviate some of the stress. I can wear them for 8 hours, others complain they are just too heavy.
1 HP-1000’s. Though not as heavy as the PS-1’s, the headband can’t be as easily bent and therefore they sometimes hang over the ears more than comfortably fit them. That and the fact that stock, their headband is thinner than those of their cousins, I find that my head can hurt after a while without some modding of the headband. They do come stock with flats though, which is great on the ears.
[size=small]Aesthetics:[/size]
This section is really subjective and I really like the various aesthetic qualities of each model, from the dark wooden cups of the RS-1’s and MS-Pro’s to the metal indestrutible look of the HP-1000’s and PS-1’s so it is hard to choose, but here goes:
5 RS-1/MS Pro. I think John got it right the first time. A wonderful design, both simple and classy. The wood is just a wonderful touch even if it were only cosmetic in nature, which thankfully for us, it is not.
3 HP-1000. The look of metal, metal and more metal. Though I like the longer cups of their cousins, no doubt the all metal design with screws ranks second for me.
2 PS-1. A nearly perfect headphone. Had it come with metal clamps and screws I would have placed this even above the RS-1’s (unless they too came with clamps and screws, preferably in black anodized)
1 GS-1000. Though not a huge step away from the RS-1’s, I personally prefer the former cup design and the massive pads, albeit wonderfully comfortable and exceptional in offering a new and pleasing sound field, look quite um, distinctive when wearing them and thus have to take a hit among the 5 phones here.
[size=medium]SOUND[/size]
The reason we stop by Head-fi and the reason we throw down our hard earned cash, the sound! There will always be a debate between the signature sound of Joseph Grado and that of John Grado. For those that own them all, they don’t really have to care, to those that can’t source out a Joseph Grado…they may want to believe John Grado’s sound is it for them, and it well may be, but it might not. Conversely, those that can’t find the ultra-rare PS-1’s may claim the HP-1000’s are the de facto metal Grado and nothing can touch it, at least until they hear those PS-1’s
Whatever the case, the end result is that it is a subjective opinion but can be based on some objective facts.
Grados are voiced heavily by ear which, thanks to solid genetics, golden ears seem to run in the Grado family. As I’ve written before, I highly doubt any manufacturer produces products exclusively by machine testing and evaluation. Eventually folks listen to their products before selling. If the Grados chose to place more emphasis on what they hear/like, then so be it. Thankfully not just a few folks enjoy what the Grados think is good sound.
Joseph Grado set out to design the best production transducer possible. He wanted a very linear, very neutral sound so that what was recorded is what was heard. This would be of great value to recording engineers and eventually to some audiophiles who wanted to get as close to the recording as possible. Getting as close to the recording as possible is the key for many. Some argue that the goal of audiophiles is to get as close to real life as possible. I don’t disagree with this and often my goal is the same, provided that real life doesn’t sound awful, which it can and often does (stadium rock recordings for instance). However, approximating real life and approximating the recording are two different things. Some will argue that it is impossible to approximate real life from a recording, so in the end, a system should be as neutral as possible so that what comes through from whatever disc is spinning is what is on that disc and nothing more or less. Yet, when a recording is awful, does one want to approximate this awful recording? Or would one rather have a system that has some colouration which adds life and realism, which in the end better approximates what life may sound like? Certainly, the recording equipment could be injecting some serious hash into the mix and the live sound is hindered in a major way, moreover, maybe the recording engineer is going deaf, or is heavy on the brickwalling or has a distorted view of what good sound is. What then? Best case scenerio is that one can have their cake and eat it too. No doubt one of the major advantages of headphones is that it is quite easy to own more than one pair and swapping between cans (and associated amps) is far easier than doing the same with speakers. Thus, for those that want an ultra-neutral experience, sourcing out some Joseph Grados is the way to go, HP-1000’s preferred, and then having a pair of wooden John Grados on hand for something with what I call a bit more life. Does this “life” come at the expense of the sound? I don’t believe so, and in fact, I was recently reading a remark from Headroom that indicated that headphones required a bit of a bump in the bass region to compensate for the lack of room acoustics in the neatherregions of the music and a slight dip in the upper treble to compensate for the driver being so close to the ear. It seems to me that John was able to do this more successfully because his goal was to make headphones that music lovers would love to use while listening to their much loved music!
The good then is that folks can have it both ways, the bad is that both the HP-1000’s and PS-1’s are very difficult to find, and at reasonable prices. Though the PS-1’s retailed for $1400, they are selling above $2k and I believe if I remember correctly, the last pair I saw for sale went for $2600. That is nearly a 100% increase in price in less than 4 years of existence. It doesn’t help that they were limited to about 250 pairs. Meanwhile, the HP-1000’s with numbers around 1000 are going for anywhere between $1400 and $2400 when their initial price 15+ years ago was $395, $495 and $595 (3, 2, 1). Quite a large jump and again with the limited numbers and high costs, for most, their options are limited to the RS-1’s, MS-Pro’s and GS-1000’s. So how does this bode for Grado fans?
For those that want a more neutral sound and adore the HP-1000’s their hopes were clearly directed at the PS-1 until that run went dry. The PS-1’s are the most neutral of the John line, but the GS-1000’s aren’t too far off when paired with the right amp so folks can look to these headphones if need be. The MS-Pro’s, though based on the RS-1’s use a different level of destressing and driver tweaking to be more neutral, less of a rounded mid-bass bump so they fall more in line with the PS-1’s. Still, nothing compares to the HP-1000’s for neutrality and that includes all headphones not just Grados.
Usually when I think about headphones and sound, I break up the spectrum into bass, midrange and treble and then I go into great detail from there. I’ll try that for this comparison because there are some major differences in the bottom end of each headphone which will get me into the groove of describing the sonic attributes of each.
When I first began my headphone journey I began with Grado SR-60’s. They had the best bass I had ever heard from headphones and well from speakers too! My experience was admittedly very limited back then but the wonderful SR-60 bass is what hooked me onto wonderful sound and what might be possible in the future. Reading through websites during the very early stages of the web, I came across reviews of the RS-1’s and the hyperbolic adjectives used to describe them over the SR-60’s. I had to own them! Eventually I did, but then I caught wind of the HP-1000’s and they were said to be even better! It was all too much for me, or so I thought, and who knew I would become a headphone fanatic in under 3 years and a long standing addict after 10! Though the essence of music comes from the midrange, the foundation and body is firmly planted in the bass region. Without proper bass, a musical piece can either sound horribly distorted and muddy with an over-abundance of it, or sound horribly aenemic, thin and hollow when it is lacking. Grados do bass very well, and the phones I compared all do it very very well. Grados are renowned for being fun headphones to listen to. Many declare that they can’t stop their feet from tapping, their heads from bopping, the PRaT of Grados is where it is at and that is driven by their exceptional bass. Each of these Grados was rated down to at least 20 Hz. Few musical pieces can get that low and even though three of the Grados are confirmed to be rated at lower than 20 Hz, one will never experience the unfortunate bowel moving experience of DEEEEP bass because well, headphones just can’t do that. Yet, purchasing any one of these phones, one should feel confident that one is going to get the most out of the low end of their music. But does each model perform equally as well? I don’t think so. I do hear differences.
When I first heard the RS-1’s and later the MS-Pro’s, I was astonished at how deep the bass went. It went lower than the SR-60’s and it was very exciting to hear the layering of the lower notes which on most systems would sound like a one note BOOM. This new-found layering became an addiction for me, whatever headphone could do it better, I had to own. With the then hype of the HP-1000’s as the new reigning champ of bass, I physically needed to hear them, it wasn’t just a desire, it was a compulsion. I couldn’t sleep right until I heard them. The first chance I got, I sat down for hours, flipped through disc after disc, first listening to some electronic music, the best place to find insanely deep notes and then for the ultimate in deep, organ music. To my absolute delight, the HP-1000’s did in fact have a more layered bass! It was immediately addictive and I eventually bought the pair I auditioned, and went on to own just over half a dozen other HP-1000’s over the years. The HP-1000’s without a doubt have the tightest and snappiest bass I have ever heard. The transients are quick and crisp and the decay is never overly extended. This leads to a very hard hitting experience and a superior layering of the notes. It also provides for a deceptively deeper bass. At first I was in the “HP-1000’s have deeper bass” camp. It wasn’t until Hirsch mentioned that on better amps, the RS-1’s indeed had deeper bass, and it was at least as equally layered, so long as that bump in the upper bass, lower midrange wasn’t overly. The problem is that if the bass is not properly controled, it is overemphasized and drowns out the lower notes. Yet, the RS-1’s and MS-Pro’s (which is slightly better than the RS-1’s here because they have a more subdued bass hump) are capable of wonderful layering and deeper notes than the HP-1000’s.
Following the bass line is still much easier on the HP-1000’s than any other Grado save for the GS-1000’s, but ultimately I personally have found the overall sound to be less satisfying than the other Grados. This is the reason I’ve owned so many and why I don’t own any now. I kept coming back to that wonderful snap to the bass, but when push came to shove and something had to go, it was always the HP-1000. If I could have affored to keep them I would have, but when I kept acquiring new phones, namely the PS-1’s and the GS-1000’s, the HP-1000’s just couldn’t keep up in my opinion and their super crisp palpable bass wasn’t enough to keep them around. In essence, for me, their sound was too thin, too “boring.” I suppose it is a result of not enough of that spectrum tweaking Headroom indicated being necessary for a natural sound.
The PS-1’s were introduced as the answer to the HP-1000’s but with John’s own interpretation of amazing sound. The PS-1’s were initially known as BASS MONSTERS! Incredible amounts of bass, hard hitting, layered, deep, and audible. So many felt it was perfect bass, others found it to be too much. Again, amps came into the equation quickly and with the right amp, the PS-1’s moved me in ways that the HP-1000’s just couldn’t do. First, many jumped to place flats on the PS-1’s. Placing flats on any Grado obviously brings the drivers closer to the ears; it also forces all the sound into the canal and doesn’t provide as large of a space for the bass to disperse. This can create a distorted unbalanced sound if the drivers have not been designed for the pads to be that close to the head. Though the HP-1000’s and RS-1’s/MS-Pro’s were initially voiced with the flats, the PS-1’s were voiced with the bowls and really require them to sound their best. Using the flats creates far too much bass and one not only overpowers the very low end, but muffles the midrange and treble. I fell for this originally and then went back to the bowls for critical listening. Although the HP-1000’s still had a better leading edge and a quicker decay, the PS-1’s bested them in pure hard hitting power. The extended decay, though not too much for me, also meant that in the end, the music had a better body and more PRaT. I did miss and still do miss the attack of the HP-1000’s and I hoped the GS-1000’s would fill the missing gap.
Compared to every other Grado, the GS-1000’s have the most bass, both in power and abundance, that is, if one uses anything but the very large cushions it comes with. Putting flats or bowls on these will completely ruin the sound in my opinion. The bass practically one note, the midrange is muffled and the treble sounds off. With the superbowls, the drivers are moved quite a ways away from the ear, and a large chamber is present for the bass to disperse nicely before getting to the ear drum. Although the HP-1000’s can still lay claim to the best leading edge, the gap has been shortened. The GS-1000’s have a very good attack and the decay is even better than the PS-1’s. One gets nearly the attack of the HP-1000’s a better decay than the PS-1’s, a deeper bass than the HP-1000’s and is at the height of the Grados in terms of layering. I believe these attributes to be among the main reasons for my preference for the GS-1000’s as my main listening headphones over the other ones I own.
The midrange of Grados has always been praised and even though each one tends to be a bit different from their relatives, the overall experience is very similar. No headphone does midrange like a Grado does. Again, the HP-1000’s have the most linear midrange, but this linearity may be more of a perception based on the amount of bass and the treble than the actual response of the midrange. The midrange is a tad dryer than the GS-1000’s and moreso than the MS Pro’s where as it and RS-1’s and sorely lacks in my opinion compared to the PS-1’s. If I had to choose any midrange from any transducer I have ever heard, I would choose that of the PS-1’s. The overall sound of the PS-1’s can usually be described as liquid or smooth, while contraindicatively maintaining microdetails. Even though the midranges are very close, this liquid signature is apparent to me and so I give the edge to the PS-1’s. Still, any of the Grados fair so very well here, heck even the SR60’s. In fact, I wouldn’t say that the SR60’s lose much to any of these big boys. Grados do midrange nearly perfectly for me. Check out a solo classical guitar and you will know what I mean. So this is a matter of grades within an already awesome offering from Grado Labs. YMMV.
The treble, ah yes the treble. There is so much controversy among Grado fans and detractors alike. Some find them bright, some find them perfect. I think Grados do very well in the treble and I think the GS-1000’s do it best when paired with the proper amp, otherwise I would choose the PS-1’s. The treble is well extended on each headphone with more grain coming from the RS-1’s and MS-Pro’s. The HP-1000’s to me, sound more extended than the RS-1’s and MS-Pro’s in most cases, but less so than the PS-1’s and GS-1000’s. The PS-1’s offer the smoothest top end, so very nice to listen to, never a hint of transducer derived hot Ssss sounds yet lacking in the wonderful sparkle of the GS-1000’s. In terms of sparkle, which can most aptly be heard from the shimmer of a cymbal, no headphone that I have heard does it as well as the R10’s. Really, that top end, though bright for me more often than not, has the most wonderful sparkle. The GS-1000’s fall short, not by a lot, but enough to note that the R10’s really are in a class by itself. The GS-1000’s are hard to control up top when not paired with the right gear. The sound can come off as hot with a good amount of Ssss’ from the transducer. Vinyl and the EAR HP4 seem to take care of all of that in my system. I don’t experience this nor do I need to listen at very low volumes in order to enjoy them. I do not find the GS-1000’s fatiguing, but I admit to not having paired them up with much else than my own gear which I have painstakingly tuned for Grados.
Overall, I think the Grados here compete well against each other, but if I could have a perfect Grado considering bass, midrange and treble, I would want the attack of the HP-1000’s, the depth and force of the GS-1000’s, the midrange of the PS-1’s, the smoothness of the PS-1’s treble with the shimmer of the GS-1000’s (or ideally the R10’s). But there is still quite a bit more to sound reproduction than merely the various frequency ranges. There is imaging, soundstage, headstage, body, tone and timbre. A good bit of the essence of music only comes through when we take into account these latter attributes. Not to mention dynamics!
Lately there has been more than a few professional writers claiming that earbuds, ipods and mp3’s as good enough. Those that believe this can stop reading now We are hear because we don’t just want to hear the notes, hear the lyrics, follow the beat, we want to live the music, to pratically breathe it in and survive off of it.
It takes a good setup to recreate this and it takes a very good headphones setup to get it right because of the inherent limitations of headphons. Headphones will never reproduce a realistic soundstage nor will they ever do realistic bass, but they can more than make up for this in the areas of resolution, imaging as well as just sounding great overall.
Among these Grados, macroresolution and overall dynamics isn’t a problem for any of them. In fact, I would be hard pressed to grade them because they are so closely matched. Maybe the GS-1000’s offer better dynamics because of their distance from the ears, but some may argue otherwise. I do believe they do, but it isn’t such a grand rift between the models to justify spending time discussing it. Where there is a large difference is in soundstage and headstage, and the overall sound of the music.
Once again I’ll write a quick blurb regarding soundstage and headstage. I take from Darth Nut who defined headstage as that overall in head experience, where the musicians are prominantly portrayed, and soundstage as the ultimate perceived distance the sound is able to portray. For instance, there are some tracks, recorded in a church, where the musicians may sound as if they are right in front of me, but a held note may sound as if it is going up up up WAAY up to the ceiling and that may be perceived as being 50 ft in the air, even though the performers sound like they are singing directly into my ear. I have always found Grados to do very very well on soundstage dimensions but they lacked when it came to headstaging when listening to large scale acts. In fact, I pretty well give the thumbs up to most open headphones, I have never really felt a closed headphone does soundstaging right, but they can be and often are superior for headstaging.
Back to Grados. Grados with flats = small headstage. It doesn’t matter which Grado, they all sound closed in, the performers are right next to you, dripping their sweat onto your brow, licking your ear and all that good stuff. If it happens to be Ella Fitzgerald in her prime, no problem! If it happens to be Keith Richards from the last tour, well, um…YMMV. Even with flats, the HP-1000’s seem to have a larger headstage than the RS-1’s or MS-Pro’s with flats. The sound axis from left to right seems larger, providing a bigger space and essentially moving the performers back a few steps and maybe the listner, off stage. The RS-1’s and MS-Pro’s are right there in the thick of things, unless bowls are used and then one steps back to front row along side the PS-1’s. The headstage is larger than with bowls and even larger than HP-1000’s with flats, but nothing comapres with the GS-1000’s however which throw the listener back to middle of the hall and maybe back further, enabling the listener to take in a greater abundance of sound, each instrument not just easy to follow along to but the performance as a whole takes on a great cohesion. No Grado can do this as well as the GS-1000’s and unfortunately, throwing on a pair of superbowls won’t transform another Grado into a GS-1000. The bass will get aenemic, the treble will get pitchy and the midrange goodness will be lost in the shuffle. For whatever reason, the last while I have prefered this presentation, maybe because I have been listening to larger scale works, even though I usually tend to listen to small bands or chamber ensembles. If I want intimacy I head for RS-1’s, if I want scale and perspective I put on the GS-1000’s. Still, when considering soundstage, I don’t perceive much of a difference between the RS-1’s, MS-Pro’s and PS-1’s. They all seem to have a wonderful decay of sound as it flows away into the distance. I believe the longer cup aids in this and because the GS-1000’s have the added advantage of the large pads, they even have a larger perceived sound field. It makes for a wonderful change up.
Even given all these aspects of the sound, there is no area that has greater variability for me than in the tone and timbre of the notes. This is where choosing a Grado can have a dramatic effect on the sound. If one is into chamber music, lots of woodwinds and strings, I would highly recommend the RS-1’s and MS-Pro’s. Their wooden cups and tuning reproduces such wonderful and realistic sounds that to this day I have yet to hear a headphone that matches them. Clarinets and cellos in particular sound incredibly life-like, even the GS-1000’s can’t keep up. They aren’t embarassed, because they are very close, but I think the driver was tuned to have a bit less colouration than the MS-Pro’s and even more so than the RS-1’s. The PS-1’s and HP-1000’s don’t fail here, but they just can’t resonate the same way because they are metal. So where they may lose some footing to the woodies, they more than make up for it when electric guitars are heard. Here the metals provide edginess to the sound that contributes just that much more to the realness of the sound. All Grados do guitar well, mainly because guitars are generally well-footed in the midrange, but the metal Grados with their different resonance affect the sound differently and “tuning” can take place depending on the music used. I often tend to listen this way, heading for the PS-1’s for amplified rock, and falling back to the RS-1’s for small acoustic sessions or chamber pieces. I’m lucky, and I know it.
Because of my personal music preferences, I rate the RS-1’s as the top phone tonally for me, with the GS-1000’s closely behind.
I’m finishing up the 11th page here, and I think I may have lost folks 7 pages up. I hope I have covered everything or mostly everything. Again, these are my opinions using my gear.
So a quick roundup in scoring:
[size=small]Bass[/size]
5 GS-1000. The abundance, solidity, layering and depth make this the reigning champ.
4 PS-1. It would have been champ had the GS-1000 not been introduced.
3 HP-1000. Although it loses out in amount of bass, the quality is exceptional and the attack is second to none.
2 RS-1/MS Pro. Though I generally prefer their bass to the HP-1000’s, I don’t know I would rebuy the RS-1’s on bass quality alone, but I did many times with the HP-1000’s.
[size=small]Midrange[/size]
5 PS-1’s. Despite all Grados sounding so close in the midrange, nothing so liquid could lose out to its brethren. PS-1’s for the win!
4 RS-1’s. Because of its overall tone and timbre, that is well suited to my tastes, I rank it above the others, just slightly more liquid and warm as compared to the MS-Pro’s but enough so to place it in the second spot.
3 MS-Pro’s. So close to the RS-1’s but just falling a hair shy for being too dry.
2 GS-1000’s. Better tone and timbre than the HP-1000’s but dryer than the MS-Pro’s.
1 HP-1000’s. Sorry mate, you were meant for the studio, and in these games of high stakes midrange superiority, you come up short. But you are still a Grado, so you demolish all the rest
[size=small]Treble[/size]
5 PS-1’s. Never a hint of shrillness, smooth all the way up. Extended, sublime, wonderful treble. Give me some R10 shimmer and this becomes the best treble around.
4 GS-1000’s. When broken in and controled, the GS-1000 offers speed, sparkle and extension, smoother than the RS-1’s, but loses to the PS-1’s.
3 HP-1000’s. Extended and controled, with no hints of grain. A wonderful treble by any stretch, just not as good as the top two.
2 RS-1’s/MS-Pro’s. Well extended but grainier than the other offerings. Again we are dealing with such small differences, but that is what is expected in a comparative review.
[size=small]Soundstage[/size]
5 GS-1000. No contest, they are BIG and they give a BIG sound.
4 PS-1/RS-1/MS-Pro. They may lose out to their earmuffs of a brother, but they hold their own very well.
3 HP-1000. They nearly make it but they ‘ahem’ come up short where it counts.
[size=small]Headstage[/size]
5 GS-1000. Again, bigger is better here, and the greater the distance from the ears, the larger the headstage.
4 PS-1’s. Designed with bowls in mind, they offer a tad larger soundfield than the other phones.
3 HP-1000’s. Without the bowls, the HP-1000’s generate a larger headstage, but would fall short if the RS-1’s or MS-Pro’s used bowls, but then that advantage would be negated if bowls are used with the HP-1000’s.
2 RS-1’s/MS-Pro’s. With the flats you lose, sorry, just the way it goes.
[size=small]Body/Tone/Timbre[/size]
5 RS-1’s. I’m partial to music that benefits from their construction. Their warmer presentation puts them ahead of the MS-Pro’s.
4 MS-Pro’s. So close but the tweaking makes them better for a studio, and less so for my musical enjoyment.
3 GS-1000. Though a woody, they are voiced to be more linear than either of the reference series styled headphones.
2 PS-1’s. Although the liquid sound and wonderful bass really adds to the body, they are metal, and for me, I love the resonance and colouration of the woodies.
1 HP-1000’s. Neutral. Neutral. Neutral. Sometimes being neutral means sucking the life out of music. This happened one time too many for me. Still, this was only when comparing with the other Grados. Left alone and they would be my top choice.
[size=small]Resolution[/size]
5 GS-1000. As I indicated in the first part of this review, the GS-1000’s are incredibly refined and offer detail extraction like no other Grado. The note separation is a step ahead of the competition here on both a macro and micro scale.
4 HP-1000’s. Though I do believe the other phones have more, it is easier to pick out because of the decreased bass, and so I give the edge to the HP-1000’s.
3 PS-1’s. Some claim these have the same finesse as the Omega II’s. I would agree in most cases but the liquid sound sometimes obscures details when compared with the HP-1000’s.
2 MS-Pro’s. Because of the decreased bass and the cooler sound, they get the edge over the RS-1’s.
1 RS-1’s. Awesome in the overall grand scheme of luxury headphones, but when compared with the best of Grado, they lose out.
[size=small]Overall Score[/size]
Having returned to the video game world, I have noticed that games are scored categorically and then an overall score is provided which is not an mean of the categories. I want to do the same here. Of course this is really just me relating to you what my favourite headphones are but whatever.
5 GS-1000/RS-1/PS-1. I admire them for different reasons and I wouldn’t want to sell any of them. I appreciate the grand sound of the GS-1000’s, the detail and impact. I apprecaite the intimacy of the RS-1’s and that warm tone and near perfect timbre. The PS-1’s offer up one of the most relaxing and enchanting sounds I’ve yet heard, that liquid flow is unmatched.
2 HP-1000’s. Blasphemy to be sure, but their linearity is their downfall for me more often than not.
1 MS-Pro’s. They offer up much of the advantages of the RS-1’s but fall short in areas I prefer. Never quite an RS-1 and not even remotely close to the HP-1000’s. It tries hard but doesn’t do it for me.
So that’s it, it took a while but I hope this will be an enjoyable enough read that it makes up for some of the delay. In the end, it is hard to rate headphones that are so very close in quality overall, but there are enough differences that make it possible. Personally, I don't think anyone can go wrong owning any of the headphones reviewed.
Happy Listening.
The excitement of a new top-shelf product is rarely without some form of controversy. The sceptics and critics will crawl out of the woodwork to dispute the claims of the “fanboys” and enthusiastic early adopters. When the product is a Grado, at least on this forum, we take the above to the Nth degree. It does seem that no company draws a line between the membership like Grado Labs. One customarily loves a Grado or hates a Grado; there are few that are “content” with the sound and “keep a pair around for kicks.”
Why do Grado products cause such a stir? In the end, it comes down to the sound and many don’t agree with the practice of “tuning” with the ear. John Grado, and his uncle Joseph before him, both “tune” their products so that it sounds the way they want it to sound. That certainly does not mean they avoid using testing systems to objectively measure the item, but in the end, numbers mean little if the sound is not to their liking. I would gather the vast majority of manufacturers don’t produce and market items without listening first, would it be a stretch to say that likely NO manufacturer does that? Perhaps one manufacturer will place greater emphasis on white papers, frequency responses and numbers than their own ear. Not everyone is gifted with a good ear, let alone a golden ear, which apparently Joe and John have been said to possess. If one has a tin ear, then maybe selling something based on excellent specs is the way to go. Regardless, it is a choice and in the end, one is free to buy want they want to buy. This has been John’s motto forever. If you don’t like Grado, buy something that you do like.
However, here comes this new Grado, this apparently different beast altogether. Are they meant for those who have never found a Grado they like? Or are they meant for the hardcore Grado fan? I mean it looks kinda like a Grado doesn’t it. It has that distinctive retro look to it. Simple head-band? Check. Old-style mounts for the cups? Check. Y-connected cord? Check. Though the cups mimic the updated look first introduced with the 325i’s, they are quite similar to the RS-1’s. The length of the cup is the same, and it uses the same cured mahogany as the RS-1’s. So what is different besides the mushroomed outer edge of the chambers? Well, for starters we have our first introduction to the superbowls! Here we see mammoth sized foam pads, significantly larger than the bowls. Oh…and the drivers are new too, but I figured everyone knew that already!
Do these changes effect a sound that is superior to the RS-1’s? To the PS-1’s? How about the HP-1000’s? Are these phones worth $1000? Will they appeal to Grado lovers and those who have chosen a different path? Well, I’ll get to how the phones sound in a moment, but to be sure, answers to these questions are going to be subjective in the end, at least partly. As for all reviews of this type, these are my own personal impressions, based on my analysis and listening with my gear, in my home. So take them for what they are.
My gear is listed in my profile, but for expediency, I’ll list what I used to review the phones:
Source:
Analogue: Michell Gyrodec with the Orbe bearing/platter, SME V arm, Koetsu Black cart
Digital:
Shanling CD T-100 modded a good bunch, tubes were the Bendix Redbank 6385’s.
Amps:
Ear 834 phono stage using Telefunkens
Ear HP4 headphone amp using matched quad of 1944 gold pin Sylvanias
Melos SHA-X, tubes were the CBS/Hytron 7318’s
Grado RA-1
Headphones:
Certainly comparing to some other headphones would be fun right?
Grado RS-1
Grado PS-1
Grado HP-1
Grado HP-2
Alessandro MS-Pro
Cables:
All are gold plated tri-alloys with WBT NeXt Gen connectors.
Music:
Too much to really list, but I have used something from just about every genre.
[size=small]Part I:[/size]
So new Grados, huh? We’ve had a few new pairs over the last 2 years or so. The PS-1’s came on the scene, quietly, as a stand alone model for the German distributor, meant for recording engineers. Todd Green helped some lucky Head-fiers get a hold of a pair. They weren’t cheap, and they were limited to about 200 pairs worldwide. They sound great though! In fact, many sold off their beloved HP-1000’s after hearing a pair. For some detailed impressions you can read my review here.
Then we were introduced to the 325i’s - an upgrade to the top-of-the-line prestige series phone. As I already mentioned, this is the phone that first took on the new look for the exterior of the cups, whereas the PS-1’s were essentially a metal alloy RS-1 in looks. They also sported a new driver. The 325i’s are still in production and will likely remain so for a good while.
Shortly thereafter, we were treated to the limited edition Head-fi exclusive HF-1, again via Todd Green. This phone looked like a 225 but had a mahogany driver housing. It was and still is widely proclaimed to be an improvement over the already much loved 225’s. For those not familiar with the Grado line in its entirety, the 225’s are widely thought to be the “best bang for the buck” in the line. Although the SR60’s may appeal more to the general audience of headphone listeners, the 225’s are firmly set as a standard for those that are interested in something more than a throw around phone for portable gear on the go. Not that there is anything wrong with that. I own a pair of SR60’s and started out with them. They are certainly an excellent “starter” phone and perhaps will be all that one needs, they sound great out of a receiver and out of an mp3 player. They do sound wonderful, but they are rather 2D in presentation and the addition of a headphone amp does not overly affect the sound to the level that an amp has on the 225’s. Yet, the HF-1’s were said to be better AND they were cheaper. Not too bad! Yet, the 325i’s and HF-1’s were only wetting the appetite of some who wanted to listen to something state-of the-art.
In my interview with John Grado last year, many had requested a new statement phone, something that pushed the boundaries of sound and would compete with some of the recent top of the line phones from the likes of Sony (Qualia), Audio Technica (L3000) and Sennheiser (HD650). Though the 325’s and HF-1’s were indeed new and sounded incredible at their price points, they still fell short of the RS-1’s, the current top Grado at the time. The PS-1’s had been discontinued by then, and again, they were never intended for worldwide distribution. So even if some felt they were the best Grado ever made, they were not a production line model and so folks unlucky enough to have missed out on them, had to wait for something else, something new.
Shortly thereafter, John Grado answered those wants and desires, introducing this new phone at the Head-fi National Meet in NYC back in May. Though the 2 pairs demo’d there were only prototypes, Jude could not hide his excitement and wanted to show them off. Jude has been a long-time fan of Grado, having owned the HP-1000’s and HF-1’s (and maybe a 225?) but his heart and been firmly set in the Sennheiser camp with his absolute love for the Big O (HE90/Hev90) and the HD6x0 series. Yet, after a short listen, Jude was so mesmerized he just HAD to show the other Head-fiers what was getting him so excited. That was the start of the craze.
A myriad of questions ensued. Speculation was rampant and at the end of the day the bottom line for most was: when will they be available!
At first, there was a delay because of the packaging. For those that were really eager to get a pair (me included) an option existed that one could opt to receive them, well packaged, in a brown cardboard box. I’m all about the phones; I just wanted them as soon as possible. A good number for folks went the same route. I doubt many were disappointed.
As of right now, I see them listed on the Grado Labs website, so I will assume the packaging bit has been worked out and they are available through the regular distributor/dealer network.
Look and Feel:
When my phones arrived, I was just on my way out to work. I had a meeting the following hour but I did take a quick peak, ripped open the box like the Hulk after a tank snipes a headshot, to inspect the phones (despite my intensity, I was careful) and then well, why not take a minute or so to listen. I fired up my gear, listened and regretted that I had to depart so soon. Yet, what an enticement to return home that evening for what would evolve into a marathon of a night of enjoyment. I barely slept, listening to “just one more song” which quickly turned into “just one more album.” Were they worth the wait? Did they live up to the hype? Well, with only a minute or so with them, I could easily pick out some new aspects to the sound that many were discussing. This indeed was a new Grado sound, but at the same time disctinctly Grado. Might this phone then appeal to the detractors? Yes, I think it will, particularly to those who might have refused to enjoy the Grado sound based on claims of discomfort. There sure wasn’t any discomfort with these new pads! Are these phones ever comfortable! Now, I have medium to small ears I guess, though I always thought myself to be in the medium to near large category, regardless, those with “Dumbo Ears” might have issues with these superbowls, but then, they would have the same issues with any headphone, so it really is moot. What am I getting at? These headphones are comfortable if only because of the way the pads are designed. Are they the most comfortable headphone I have ever used? If they are not, they come second only to the Sony MDR-F1’s, which, for me, are the most comfortable headphone of all time. The Sony R10’s were second but now displaced. However, the F1’s, with their open, light weight design and valour pads, heh, seriously, air on the ears, just weightless and super comfy, but the GS-1k’s are close given the pads rarely even touch the ears! If they never did touch, I would give them the first spot.
Is there anything special about these pads beyond their size? To be sure, I did try them out on a bunch of other Grados (HP-2, HP-1, RS-1, MS-Pro, PS-1, SR-60, Sr-325i) for kicks and I’ll deal with the sonic differences in Part II, but for now, I will say that the size of the pads lends to a unique distribution of the weight. Because the pads force the headband apart, instead of the total force of the headphones directing straight down on the head as is the effect with bowls or flats (and by extension, with most headphones if not all headphones), the force is now distributed slightly outwards as well, effectively dispersing the weight, and making the phones feel lighter than they really are. Can this ever be a bad thing? No not at all, at least not in my opinion. This weight dispersion occurred with every phone I tried them with, which makes complete sense. As a quick note, it was a really nice feeling when using the beefy PS-1’s.
Tech Specs:
Aside from the new pads and the new outer bezel of the cups, the GS-1000’s look very similar to the RS-1’s and in fact, to the entire line of Grado headphones. The new Grado Statements sport the same vented diaphram design as all other Grados save for the now discontinued SR-40 as well as having a wooden air chamber like the Reference series before it. The voice coil and the copper in the cable are both UHPLC taken again from the Reference series. When it comes to wire, at this level of purity you can’t really improve (snake oil aside) so the only alternatives would be to use either silver or some other metal (gold or tri-alloy). Considering copper is a standard and generally accepted to be a good choice in cables (not sure about voice coils but I’ll assume that most are made with copper) then the GS-1000’s could not have bettered what the RS-2’s and RS-1’s already used, which is close to the purest copper available.
The drivers are dynamic, open air design, matched to 0.05 db, the same as the References series but it is not a legacy driver. The GS-1k sports an entirely new, redesigned driver. Folks, this is NOT your RS-1, PS-1 or 325i driver. You don’t believe me? Fine, but I then urge you detractors to take a GS1k and plop flats or bowls on them, and vice versa, do the same with any other Grado. There is simply no way this can be the same driver as any older Grado just based on that this testing method. Now balk at my statement above, which of course is fact, since it has be taken straight from the horses mouth - John Grado! In the end it really does't matter, new or old, they do sound different, better or not, that is subjective, but different for sure.
The stated frequency response is 8-35, 000 Hz, a bit more than the RS-1’s 12-30, 000. Now, given that 8 Hz is in the "feel it not hear it" zonw, which, well, once I get to the force of the bass, it really is a feel it vs. hear it scenario, I'm sure some will love the ratings. As for 35 kHz, unless one is a dolphin or a bat, this is way beyond our hearing, but it may be very important for harmonics. The SPL at 1mV - 98, is the same as the RS-1's. The impedance is the same 32 ohms that all Grados seem to possess yet I will say that some Grados are easier to drive than others, and the GS-1k’s are no exception to this trend. Personally I find the GS-1k's easier to drive than the RS-1's.
Overall, looking at the phones and reading the specs, one can surmise that this can’t be all that different from previous Grados right? Sure the pads are larger, but could that really affect the sound to such a dramatic extent? Okay, so maybe these new drivers do something different, but such a drastic difference as to warrant an upgrade from the RS-1’s? Calling them different through and through? Let’s find out!
Sonic Impressions:
On first opening the package, I was drawn to the massive pads. I call them superbowls; I'm sure others will come up with their own terminology including bagels, so I have read. The placement of the driver far from the ear is quite unique. Perhaps this is what some were trying to do with the Headphile pads which were all the rage?
Larry at Headphile was experimenting with Beyerdynamic pads I think and this must have kept the driver at a similar distance, certainly it was at a greater distance than the bowls would be, sitting on or nearly around the. Once I had them on my head for a few minutes, comparing with the feel of flats and bowls, I had to plug them in!
On first listen, I was taken aback. I don't know if I conceptualized my expectations but whatever they were, they didn't coincide with what I was hearing - at least at first. I don't listen very loudly. Though Grados have this tendency to get people really into the music and thus seemingly tempting them to crank it up! (this happens to me all the time and I have to remind myself that my ears are precious.), I really try to make a concerted effort to keep the volume down so that I can listen for long periods and not have to worry about my hearing. When using the RA-1, I am rarely above 8 o'clock on the dial. When using the Ear HP4 I'm never above 9, usually hovering between 8 and 8:30. Having the dials set the same as when listening with the RS-1's, I plugged in the GS-1k's to find that the sound was very distant. No longer was I sitting on stage, not even in the first row, but instead I was somewhere near the back of the hall, maybe not even in the room. Up the dial went until I had reached a comfortable volume and I had re-entered the venue, somewhere between front-row and mid-hall.
This I feel will be the most striking difference for most on first listen. Initially I thought I would lose out on the impact Grados usually portray. However, as I became acclimated to the sound, I finally fell into a new distinct zone. The impact was certainly there, it was simply different.
Having played various instruments for 20 years or so, mostly clarinet and saxophone, the latter I played semi-professionally to help pay for college in my earlier school days, I am accustomed to the sound of the on-stage experience. The RS-1's were the first headphone that truly put me RIGHT THERE with the performers. Granted, my previous experience with headphones had solely been with the SR-60's which are no slouch in this regard either, yet the RS-1's were simply able to supercede everything the 60's did with grace and poise while excelling in the areas of intimacy, impact, decay and most prominently - more than any headphone ever, including the Sony R10's – tonal accuracy and timbre. No headphone has in my opinion, ever been able to capture the true sound of a woodwind, not like the RS-1's and certainly not that sound as a performer would hear it. The GS-1000's retain the tonal accuracy and timbre but one is no longer among the performers but distinctly a member of the audience. For many, this is going to be a welcomed trait, to others, they will want to experiment with bowls or flats to regain the onstage presence. Whatever the case may be the presentation is unique and definitely will suit some forms of music and/or some albums in particular more than others.
Continuing with the positioning of sound, without a doubt, the new Statements possess an increased soundstage and headstage. When I use these words I use them to express two distinct sound perceptions. The first is the out-of-head sound experience encompassing the entire sound field of the recorded venue. I have always felt that Grados provide excellent sound decay so that if I were listening to a recording done in a church, I could hear the sound travel up up and all the way up or if it was a live outdoor performance, then the sound would trail well off into the distance. These phones do this as well, not necessarily better than any previous Grado, but certainly no worse. What they do do though is project sound from a seemingly greater distance, what I call the headstage. For example, if I were listening to a movie and I heard someone creeping up behind me, with the RS-1's I may perceive the initial sound to be 8 ft back, but with the GS-1's I would hear it more correctly at 15 ft back, if in fact, it was at 15 ft, vs. the 8 ft. Or, when listening to music, particularly if I were using flats, so that I'm onstage with the performers, I felt that the RS-1's gave me that elbow to elbow feel as if I were in tight quarters, on a small stage. With the GS-1's and the superbowls, I'm off the stage now, but perceiving the stage, I couldn't imagine it to be small, but as big as it could sound with headphones, with a very real listening perspective for someone in the audience who will get sound cues from each instrument in their true space-time position. The sound is expansive, large, but never exaggerated. By this I mean that I never feel the headstage is disproportionately large like some headphones project. I feel it is very natural and a true pleasure to listen to. For those that felt that Grados offered a very 2d headstage experience, these demolish that giving an exquisite 3d headstage with great imaging. Here I feel the pads work wonders. The imaging is simply easier to discern, because the sound field is projected outward to a greater degree. Though, if considering a biplanar field, I feel the Y-axis is pretty well the same with either pad, the X and Z axes are the ones that really benefit from the new pads. Again, I feel the notes decay into the background to the same extent yet the sound would have to travel further using smaller cushions because the performers are closed in tighter and upfront in between the ears of the listener. For those who have never performed onstage, these new phones will present a sound they are more familiar with.
Given the pads are much larger and that the drivers are pushed back further from the ears, I was worried that the foam would absorb some frequencies more than others and thereby giving a suck-out in certain areas of the audio band. Now, I may be off here, since I can't measure the phones, but when using the flats, I felt that GS-1k’s had very prominent bass, perhaps even more than the PS-1's. No, let me restate that, with flats or bowls, the GS-1k’s simply possess the most bass I have ever heard out of anything but a cheap pair of Cerwin Vegas. Wait, am I insulting these phones already? No not in the least. What I am trying to convey however, is that these phones don’t work very well with pads other than the stock superbowls, just as John intended them to work. Putting the superbowls back on, the bass is transformed to a very balanced, tight and articulate bass that most will be thrilled with. So either the new pads do absorb some bass or the distance from the ear helps the bass notes expand out more so that once they hit the ear they are properly time-delayed. Either way, I think that the bass on these is exquisite. What some had hoped for in a new Grado phone was the tightness and layering of the HP-1000's in the bass, but with the depth and robustness of the PS-1's. I think these phones present a very nice balance of those wants. The bass exhibits a very strong walloping sound with plenty of snap. The layered bass notes is something to behold, audible way down deep, as low as anthyhing I could throw at it. Synthesized electronica bass? Yes, not a problem. What about some great organ works, Bach perhaps? Sure thing! No worries at all! Hitting a bass drum, or a timpani wakes one up, forcing one to take notice. I've always admired Grados for this experience and the GS-1000’s fall right in line with its predecessors. What is likely going to marvel most is the presentation of texture and detail. I could easily follow bass lines, something very few phones are able to adequately portray. There was never a hint of bass bloat, a "one note" reproduction. I whipped out some electronic music that goes as low as human hearing can listen and I couldn't hear any roll-off. So these new phones don't give up anything to any phone I have experience with except curbing some of the bass prominence, which provides again a more balanced presentation. The WOW! factor comes into play immediately and it has been my experience that those models that really wowed me at first, often irritated me to some degree in the future, whereas those units that caught me off guard by not exposing any one portion of the audio band more prominently than the other, or concentrating on one aspect of sound reproduction than another, always won me over in the long run. I think this is the secret to a musical phone vs. a typical "audiophile" or "hi-fi" sounding phone. Likely this is the reason I love the RS-1's so much. I never feel they exaggerate to a great degree, any one frequency, nor do they exaggerate detail, which I detest. Yet, even though the bass WOWED! me, I, to this day, love to listen to them and I have enough hours on them to call them my own, well broken in, and well loved. The bass is something to behold, outdoing all phones but one in my opinion, and in comparison to this one phone it loses out only in impact, but then, so do all other phones. The phone in question? HP-1000, any model, but more of that in Part II.
The midrange was very familiar sounding. The GS-1000 certainly exhibits the renowned Grado midrange that has made Joseph and John famous. I don't think they have any more detail nor any more magic than their predecessors, but I will say that they resemble the transparency of the RS-1's midrange over the liquid midrange of the PS-1's. I would have to really compare over many long hours using most of my collection to really make a definitive statement regarding which model bested which model. If I had to wager, I would say that there is a three-way tie here. I mean, really, how can you improve on the RS-1's midrange? Fanboyism aside, they already have the best midrange possible for my tastes so if the GS-1000’s can just approximate it if not duplicate it, then they are golden! The GS-1's simply include this, or nearly so, so in my mind, it’s a win win overall. The midrange is a familiar midrange, yet, to be certain, the midrange is sonically presented differently since the mids tend to be more recessed causing what I hear as the major factor in the “mid-hall” sound effect. If the new drivers have accentuated bass and as we shall read shortly, some elevated highs, the midrange is recessed. I’m not indicating an HD-600-like suckout here, but certainly, the audible mid-hall sound is mainly due to the midrange volume level decrease. Still, marvellously enough, all the resolution and detail one could want (or rather I could want) is present in the mids, along with that glorified timbre that is second to none. In fact, I would say that the GS-1k may have a more accurate timbre response since its note decay is faster than the previous Grado flagships, lending to a more proper tone control, less syrup, more authenticity. I like some sweet stuff with my music however, so RS-1’s, you still have a place in my heart
The highs, ah the highs. Treble notes seem to be within the most beloved yet most diffcult to represent spectrum. The detail lovers get their rocks off from accentuated highs but those that have sensitive ears don’t want a burning sensation after 30 seconds of listening, let alone 30 minutes. Some have complained that previous Grados were hot up top. Though I do feel that the SR-325’s are quite forward and the 325i’s , though less so, are still quite forward and sometimes a bit strident, the GS-1000’s (at the levels I listen at) are never fatiguing, never “hot” never urging me to throw off the phones to give my ears a rest. Though sounding exciting, the forward nature over time, would not bode as well with me as the more balanced sound of a more recessed unit. In this regard, the GS-1000's are more balanced than the 325i's and the highs are more natural and inviting. Maybe this is due to the Ear HP4? I can't say for certain though I have never had issues with the HP4 being rolled off up top. Yet, I will say that my Melos is certainly not rolled off and the RA-1 is not laid back in the treble, so for me, at my listening levels, I had no qualms with the highs. They are present, they have bite, but they don't leave my ears ringing or sore after a short while. Before they were broken in, the highs were disproportionately accentuated, but after 100 hours or so of burn in, everything really fell into place in a pretty permanent position. I would say that the phones were pretty well broken in after 50, but certainly after 100 I was not hearing anything new.
I don’t know why I usually can tolerate Grados compared to Audio Technicas or Sony’s or heck, even Sennheisers (HD580,6x0 series) but it is true, I find the highs of Grados to be overall more natural than these companies’ offerings. It has been presented that the frequency curve of the GS-1000’s would resemble a valley or at least a valley-like curve, this as opposed to the more linear sounding HP-1000’s or curves from other manufacturers. I don’t buy based on frequency curves and I would have to dispute any graph that presented a full on valley presentation. I feel the sound is natural, extended, detailed but most importantly NEVER sibilant (poor recording notwithstanding). At times, other phones can get pitchy, and I think this has been a driving factor for many to look at the flats vs. the bowls when they acquire various Grados. The GS-1000’s, with my system, using my various amps, never became sibilant. Now, my amps are not necessary known to be the most neutral (though the RA-1 has been said to be pretty transparent and close to neutral) but I will say that I have not heard sibilance nor any roll-off. There is a smoothness, an ease and naturalness to the highs even if the highs were presented more upfront compared to the mids. Some have proclaimed these phones to be the most natural and neutral Grados ever. I don’t know if I would go this far, but I will say that they are very natural sounding, and fun and enjoyable and balanced and non-fatiguing while remaing very detailed, resolution, timbrally and tonally accurate.
I found that the GS-1000’s are very versatile in terms of amplification, fairing pretty well with the lowly iPod, renowned for its deficiencies in driving low Z phones, while increasing in all areas when driven by decent SS and tube amps. My choice amp at the moment is the Ear HP4, but I have oscillated in that opinion going from Melos to Ear and back again. Some may want to know how the RA-1 performs with this new Grado. Folks, if you hate the RA-1, don’t bother responding, I just don’t care what you think. Nuff said, we all have opinions. For those that enjoy the RA-1 and feel it has a synergy with the RS-1’s then you are in for a real treat! I think that the RA-1 fairs even better with the GS-1k! Perhaps it is based on the mid-hall presentation, but the RA1/GS1k is a very special combo. Sure the headphones cost 3x the price of the RA1, but the action, the music, the joy…it is all there in spades. Since the RA-1 is quite proficient at relaying what the original signal had in store, the GS-1k’s can work their magic and extract every last bit of detail possible. In fact, save for Etymotic 4 series phones, I would say the GS-1000’s are the most resolving headphones I have ever heard (I have not heard the Qualias but they take the R10’s no problem).
With the Melos, a hyrid, one gets more “oomph” and “wallop” in the bass through the lower mids but the highs will take on a more clinical edge as opposed to using the HP4. The Ear resolves as well as anything I have heard to date but is softer in the highs (to my benefit and liking) while being softer in the bass (at least compared with the Melos). What I do love about tubes is that warm midrange glow. The Ear is not a typical tubey tube amp, but it does retain enough tube warmth to leave me smiling. The Melos may well be the hardest hitting amp I have ever heard and the GS-1000’s do benefit from this, as do all Grados, but I have always had a “thing” for the Ear and the wooden Grados and for now, the near perfect midrange presentation of the Ear is what I want the GS-1000’s to relay. The Melos is, in my opinion, best suited for the metal bodied Grados. This seems rather logical since it was designed, afterall, for the HP-1000’s!
Running at about 10 pages, I’m sure many are getting bored so I will stop for now. I’ve taken longer than I would have liked with this review, in terms of time to posting. Work and family obligations have this unreal tendency to fall in line with one’s hobbies. I’m no exception to this rule and so, given the last few months, my ups and downs and the proximate birth of my new child, well, I’ve been occupied. Yet, Part II, the comparative review (GS-1k vs. RS-1, PS-1, MS-Pro, HP1, etc) is forthcoming and won’t take nearly as long to post, ideally within a week or so. The notes are complete, I just need to sneak some time away to write it in a cohesive comprehensible form. Until then, I hope you enjoyed what I have written thus far. Oh and yes apparently I am a Grado fanboy, if not THE Grado fanboy, well according to this site anyway
[size=x-large]PART II[/size]
[size=medium]INTRODUCTION[/size]
A while ago…no wait, scratch that. A little over a while ago, or heck even a year and a half ago! I had indicated that I wanted to follow up my original review of the GS-1000’s with a comparative review between them and the PS-1’s, RS-1’s, MS-Pro’s and the HP-1000’s. For one reason or another, every time I sat down to write out my notes and get the review finished, something would come up. It has been an odd year, maybe even a really rough one, I suppose I could better comment on that at the end of my life, but for now, it has been one of the roughest of my life and so a lot of my extracurricular activities were put on hold. This included participating on Head-fi for long stints as well as writing reviews. The flip side to the mayhem was that one of the only ways I was able to stay calm and sane was by listening to headphones. The craziest bit about that is I went MONTHS without listening to my main setup. I was mainly listening to my iPod and the Westone UM2’s. One would think that if listening to music (particularly via my main setup) was really relaxing, a soothing getaway from the muck, why didn’t I do that more? Who knows, one of those “bad ideas” I guess. Or I just didn’t think of it, or whatever. Anyhow, back in October I started to listen again gradually and the last month or so has been non-stop. With this being the end of the year, all sorts of magazines are releasing their “best of” issues and I’m lost in a sea of new music I want to check out.
So with my listening kicked back up to a level I rather respect, I have once again felt the urge to write a review. I have a few things on the back burner, but I thought this one would be the one I would get out the door first, mainly because I had mentioned I would write it and finish it, time and time again. So for better or for worse…here it is:
[size=small]SCORING[/size]
To start I’m going to provide a little scoring scale which I will use throughout the review to grade different aspects of the headphones, either their build or the sound. Please remember this is a personal review - my opinion on how the phones sound and although I’m trying to throw out some objectivity it is more to aid folks in getting a quick picture on how I hear things. For the purpose of this review then, a number will be asigned to each headphone after a certain section has been written. Although I listened to 7 headphones (three different HP-1000’s over the year) I used an HP-2 with the ultrawide bandwidth cable the most, so I am going to use it as the benchmark for this review. Therefore, the scale runs from 5-1, 5 being best. If a feel there is no difference or such a small difference between phones, I’ll assign the same number to those phones and drop the lower number. 5 4 4 2 1 for instance, if I felt two phones tied for second place.
[size=small]UNITS REVIEWED[/size]
I’ve written a similar style of review back when I compared some HP-1000’s to the RS-1’s and later when I compared the PS-1’s to the HP-1000’s and the RS-1’s. The PS-1’s I used for this review are my own and are well listened to (20x as many hours as compared to the PS-1’s I used in my former review). The RS-1’s used are the same wonderful ancient pair, dark wood, gold lettering, brown headband which once had a box…but that has since left my possession. The HP-1000’s are different, though I have yet to encounter an HP-1000 that didn’t have a gazillion hours on them. After 1.5 years, the GS-1000’s too are well worked in, they have been my main headphone since I received them and I’d estimate 1200-1400 hours on them as a minimum. The MS-Pro’s used were a well broken-in pair used at a local attic studio. These were the toughest to source out for a lengthy audition but thankfully I was procure a pair for nearly half a year of listening.
[size=small]BUILD QUALITY, COMFORT, LOOK AND FEEL[/size]
To start off, let’s examine the look and feel of each headphone. All Grados share similarities to each other, owing to the retro-style of WWI/II era headphones. They are all vented diaphram, open-air dynamic headphones matched to .05 db. The phones with ¼” plugs and a Y-connected cable. They all come with foam ear cushions, with each model coming stock with a different style of ear pad. Some claim the pads are abrassive but as the user listens more and more, the oil from the ear softens the pads and for many this improves the comfort level dramatically. The headphones sit on the ear and are mostly supraaural save for the GS-1000’s using the large “superbowls” or if one has tiny ears, the bowls may in fact be circumaural as well. The headband is flexible enough to be gently bent to suit the user’s headsize. I’ve always found Grados to be very comfortable, favouring their ergonomics over other brands that tend to “clamp” the head.
HP-1000: Without writing anything more, one could assume, and likely should assume that the HP-1000 will get the 5 on build quality. Without a doubt, the HP-1000 is the best built of these Grados and well, the best Grado and likely the best headphone built ever. Though the overall look and feel of the Grados has been preserved since the introduction of the HP-1000’s, there is no doubt that the HP-2 in particular is not merely a pro-model capable of taking daily abuse in a studio but is also capable of outlasting mankind after an ELE (extinction level event). Not just defensive in nature, an HP-2 could easily be used to fend off a shady character lurking in the shadows. “The Grado HP-2, it’s not just a headphone! It could save your life!”
With its strong metal cups, metal screws that tighten the metal clamps to the metal poles which are attached to the metal headband, this all-METAL Grado is built like a tank. The leather headband is a nice touch but some have found that the leather is a bit thin and weathered by the time they get their hands on one (unless by chance lightning has struck and they sourced out a NM->M pair). Hirsch may have been the first to source out some old military headbands and modified his to have a better cushioning. The nice thing is that this mod was reversable because this add-on snapped around the current headband.
These headphones came with flat pads and a few varities of Y connected cables ending in a 1/4” plug. The first wire used was a standard copper wire which Joseph later upgrading to the Ultrawide bandwidth high purity variety.
As most know the HP-1000’s come in three versions with two really being distinctive. About 1000 total produced, only about 50 were HP-3’s. The rest were split nearly evenly between HP-1’s and 2.’s. The first is the HP-1 with polarity switches on each cup and the HP-2 sans polarity switches. In the early days of Head-fi, it seemed everyone raced after HP-1’s because they were said to be rarer than the other HP-1000’s and had the cool switches. As time went on, and folks had the opportunity to compare between HP-1’s and 2’s, many felt the HP-2’s were superior because they lacked the switches. There was a clearer sound to them or whathaveyou. Beyond the benefits of sound which may or may not be subjective, the switches are a possible point of failure and therefore the nod goes to the HP-2’s in terms of superior build. Since the HP-3’s are just HP-2’s without the same level of driver matching, of the three versions, the HP-2’s win out. I can’t seem to source out the frequency response of the HP-1000’s but I couldn’t for the life of me phathom something less than 20 Hz to 20 kHz. They are 40 ohms and the most current-demanding headphone I know of.
PS-1: The next most durable Grado is the PS-1 (and by extension the Freesystems since many a Freesystems became a PS1). The PS-1 is a cross between an RS-1/MSPro and the HP-1000. The cups are a metal alloy which may or may not be the same or as strong as the HP-1000’s. The cups are attached to a metal rod that is attached to the headband via a plastic clamp instead of a metal one with a screw to tighten and hold it in place. The leather handband is thicker than that on an HP-1000 offering more comfort which is a good thing because the PS-1’s are one of if not the heaviest headphones of the last 30 years. The cups are larger than those of the HP-1000’s extending out 3+ cm more than the HP-1000’s. The PS-1’s are tough, built to last and are John’s answer to the pro-audio market. These headphones were a special run for the German Grado distributor meant for studios around Germany. They are the rarest of the Grados and perhaps the rarest of any of the well-respected headphones and came stock with bowl pads along with the same signature Grado Y-style cable and UHPLC copper connecting cord. This copper has been rumored to be better than any wire used on an HP-1000. They are rated at 32 ohms and have a likely frequency response of at least 12 Hz to 30 kHz, maybe even 8-35. Though Freesystems was rated at 20 Hz to 20 kHz.
RS-1/MS-Pro: Representing John Grado’s first endevor at a reference headphone are the RS-1’s. Since the MS-Pro’s are essentially a tweaked-driver version of the RS-1’s, custom made for Alessandro, I’ll lop them together for the purpose of this section. The form factor of these phones is identical to that of the PS-1’s. The only difference besides the drivers is the cup material. The chambers for the RS-1’s and MS-Pro’s are made of Mahagony using an intricate curing process. This leads to a very light weight which many have enjoyed. The use UHPLC copper for the cable and used to come stock with flat pads, now they come with bowl pads, but flats are still available from our trusty Grado-loving Head-fi sponsor Todd Green at TTVJ, Todd The Vinyl Junkie They are rated at 32 ohms, and have a frequency response of 12 Hz to 30 kHz.
GS-1000’s: The current flagship and first Statement headphone, the GS-1000’s follow closely from the design of the RS-1’s, sporting the same cup material, but offering up a new look that more closely resembles the look of the recently released 325i’s. Instead of a straight out barrel/cylinder, the cups end it what some have called a mushroom head. This new design is merely cosmetic in nature as the inner chambers are pretty well the same dimensions as the RS-1’s. Besides a new driver, the GS-1000’s are the first Grado to come with the new superbowl-sized pads - MASSIVE cushions that fit entirely around the ear and thus the first true circumaural headphone from Grado. This new style also increases the comfort level of the phones by a large margin over any of the other headphones, and making these headphones feel even lighter than the RS-1’s. With the pads braced up against the sides of the head, it takes some of the downward force from the top of the head. Nice touch. Folks can now officially stop complaing about uncomfortable Grados
[size=small]Summary Scores:[/size]
[size=small]Build Quality:[/size]
5 HP-1000’s. Like anyone doubted this! No elaboration necessary.
4 PS-1’s. John’s best stab at meeting the standards of the HP-1000’s. A current Grado made to those specs would cost about the current going rate of HP-1000’s)
3 A three-way tie between the other phones. They are a more delicate trio, meant for the home user, not meant to be tossed around in a studio. Leave that to the heavy lifters above
[size=small]Comfort:[/size]
5 GS-1000’s. With their massive pads and light-weight wooden cups, they make for a comfortable marathon listening session.
4 RS-1's/MS-Pros. Though not as comfortable as their new big little brother, unless they too sport the superbowls, the RS-1’s and MS Pro’s with flats are the next best in terms of all around comfort for these ears. Lightweight and flexible, another great design for long listening sessions.
2 PS-1’s. Coming stock with bowls which are not as comfortable to me as flats (but are necessary in terms of sound) as well as the mighty heft of the phones makes them a good deal less comfortable than their wooden brothers, though since the headband is easily bent, one can alleviate some of the stress. I can wear them for 8 hours, others complain they are just too heavy.
1 HP-1000’s. Though not as heavy as the PS-1’s, the headband can’t be as easily bent and therefore they sometimes hang over the ears more than comfortably fit them. That and the fact that stock, their headband is thinner than those of their cousins, I find that my head can hurt after a while without some modding of the headband. They do come stock with flats though, which is great on the ears.
[size=small]Aesthetics:[/size]
This section is really subjective and I really like the various aesthetic qualities of each model, from the dark wooden cups of the RS-1’s and MS-Pro’s to the metal indestrutible look of the HP-1000’s and PS-1’s so it is hard to choose, but here goes:
5 RS-1/MS Pro. I think John got it right the first time. A wonderful design, both simple and classy. The wood is just a wonderful touch even if it were only cosmetic in nature, which thankfully for us, it is not.
3 HP-1000. The look of metal, metal and more metal. Though I like the longer cups of their cousins, no doubt the all metal design with screws ranks second for me.
2 PS-1. A nearly perfect headphone. Had it come with metal clamps and screws I would have placed this even above the RS-1’s (unless they too came with clamps and screws, preferably in black anodized)
1 GS-1000. Though not a huge step away from the RS-1’s, I personally prefer the former cup design and the massive pads, albeit wonderfully comfortable and exceptional in offering a new and pleasing sound field, look quite um, distinctive when wearing them and thus have to take a hit among the 5 phones here.
[size=medium]SOUND[/size]
The reason we stop by Head-fi and the reason we throw down our hard earned cash, the sound! There will always be a debate between the signature sound of Joseph Grado and that of John Grado. For those that own them all, they don’t really have to care, to those that can’t source out a Joseph Grado…they may want to believe John Grado’s sound is it for them, and it well may be, but it might not. Conversely, those that can’t find the ultra-rare PS-1’s may claim the HP-1000’s are the de facto metal Grado and nothing can touch it, at least until they hear those PS-1’s
Grados are voiced heavily by ear which, thanks to solid genetics, golden ears seem to run in the Grado family. As I’ve written before, I highly doubt any manufacturer produces products exclusively by machine testing and evaluation. Eventually folks listen to their products before selling. If the Grados chose to place more emphasis on what they hear/like, then so be it. Thankfully not just a few folks enjoy what the Grados think is good sound.
Joseph Grado set out to design the best production transducer possible. He wanted a very linear, very neutral sound so that what was recorded is what was heard. This would be of great value to recording engineers and eventually to some audiophiles who wanted to get as close to the recording as possible. Getting as close to the recording as possible is the key for many. Some argue that the goal of audiophiles is to get as close to real life as possible. I don’t disagree with this and often my goal is the same, provided that real life doesn’t sound awful, which it can and often does (stadium rock recordings for instance). However, approximating real life and approximating the recording are two different things. Some will argue that it is impossible to approximate real life from a recording, so in the end, a system should be as neutral as possible so that what comes through from whatever disc is spinning is what is on that disc and nothing more or less. Yet, when a recording is awful, does one want to approximate this awful recording? Or would one rather have a system that has some colouration which adds life and realism, which in the end better approximates what life may sound like? Certainly, the recording equipment could be injecting some serious hash into the mix and the live sound is hindered in a major way, moreover, maybe the recording engineer is going deaf, or is heavy on the brickwalling or has a distorted view of what good sound is. What then? Best case scenerio is that one can have their cake and eat it too. No doubt one of the major advantages of headphones is that it is quite easy to own more than one pair and swapping between cans (and associated amps) is far easier than doing the same with speakers. Thus, for those that want an ultra-neutral experience, sourcing out some Joseph Grados is the way to go, HP-1000’s preferred, and then having a pair of wooden John Grados on hand for something with what I call a bit more life. Does this “life” come at the expense of the sound? I don’t believe so, and in fact, I was recently reading a remark from Headroom that indicated that headphones required a bit of a bump in the bass region to compensate for the lack of room acoustics in the neatherregions of the music and a slight dip in the upper treble to compensate for the driver being so close to the ear. It seems to me that John was able to do this more successfully because his goal was to make headphones that music lovers would love to use while listening to their much loved music!
The good then is that folks can have it both ways, the bad is that both the HP-1000’s and PS-1’s are very difficult to find, and at reasonable prices. Though the PS-1’s retailed for $1400, they are selling above $2k and I believe if I remember correctly, the last pair I saw for sale went for $2600. That is nearly a 100% increase in price in less than 4 years of existence. It doesn’t help that they were limited to about 250 pairs. Meanwhile, the HP-1000’s with numbers around 1000 are going for anywhere between $1400 and $2400 when their initial price 15+ years ago was $395, $495 and $595 (3, 2, 1). Quite a large jump and again with the limited numbers and high costs, for most, their options are limited to the RS-1’s, MS-Pro’s and GS-1000’s. So how does this bode for Grado fans?
For those that want a more neutral sound and adore the HP-1000’s their hopes were clearly directed at the PS-1 until that run went dry. The PS-1’s are the most neutral of the John line, but the GS-1000’s aren’t too far off when paired with the right amp so folks can look to these headphones if need be. The MS-Pro’s, though based on the RS-1’s use a different level of destressing and driver tweaking to be more neutral, less of a rounded mid-bass bump so they fall more in line with the PS-1’s. Still, nothing compares to the HP-1000’s for neutrality and that includes all headphones not just Grados.
Usually when I think about headphones and sound, I break up the spectrum into bass, midrange and treble and then I go into great detail from there. I’ll try that for this comparison because there are some major differences in the bottom end of each headphone which will get me into the groove of describing the sonic attributes of each.
When I first began my headphone journey I began with Grado SR-60’s. They had the best bass I had ever heard from headphones and well from speakers too! My experience was admittedly very limited back then but the wonderful SR-60 bass is what hooked me onto wonderful sound and what might be possible in the future. Reading through websites during the very early stages of the web, I came across reviews of the RS-1’s and the hyperbolic adjectives used to describe them over the SR-60’s. I had to own them! Eventually I did, but then I caught wind of the HP-1000’s and they were said to be even better! It was all too much for me, or so I thought, and who knew I would become a headphone fanatic in under 3 years and a long standing addict after 10! Though the essence of music comes from the midrange, the foundation and body is firmly planted in the bass region. Without proper bass, a musical piece can either sound horribly distorted and muddy with an over-abundance of it, or sound horribly aenemic, thin and hollow when it is lacking. Grados do bass very well, and the phones I compared all do it very very well. Grados are renowned for being fun headphones to listen to. Many declare that they can’t stop their feet from tapping, their heads from bopping, the PRaT of Grados is where it is at and that is driven by their exceptional bass. Each of these Grados was rated down to at least 20 Hz. Few musical pieces can get that low and even though three of the Grados are confirmed to be rated at lower than 20 Hz, one will never experience the unfortunate bowel moving experience of DEEEEP bass because well, headphones just can’t do that. Yet, purchasing any one of these phones, one should feel confident that one is going to get the most out of the low end of their music. But does each model perform equally as well? I don’t think so. I do hear differences.
When I first heard the RS-1’s and later the MS-Pro’s, I was astonished at how deep the bass went. It went lower than the SR-60’s and it was very exciting to hear the layering of the lower notes which on most systems would sound like a one note BOOM. This new-found layering became an addiction for me, whatever headphone could do it better, I had to own. With the then hype of the HP-1000’s as the new reigning champ of bass, I physically needed to hear them, it wasn’t just a desire, it was a compulsion. I couldn’t sleep right until I heard them. The first chance I got, I sat down for hours, flipped through disc after disc, first listening to some electronic music, the best place to find insanely deep notes and then for the ultimate in deep, organ music. To my absolute delight, the HP-1000’s did in fact have a more layered bass! It was immediately addictive and I eventually bought the pair I auditioned, and went on to own just over half a dozen other HP-1000’s over the years. The HP-1000’s without a doubt have the tightest and snappiest bass I have ever heard. The transients are quick and crisp and the decay is never overly extended. This leads to a very hard hitting experience and a superior layering of the notes. It also provides for a deceptively deeper bass. At first I was in the “HP-1000’s have deeper bass” camp. It wasn’t until Hirsch mentioned that on better amps, the RS-1’s indeed had deeper bass, and it was at least as equally layered, so long as that bump in the upper bass, lower midrange wasn’t overly. The problem is that if the bass is not properly controled, it is overemphasized and drowns out the lower notes. Yet, the RS-1’s and MS-Pro’s (which is slightly better than the RS-1’s here because they have a more subdued bass hump) are capable of wonderful layering and deeper notes than the HP-1000’s.
Following the bass line is still much easier on the HP-1000’s than any other Grado save for the GS-1000’s, but ultimately I personally have found the overall sound to be less satisfying than the other Grados. This is the reason I’ve owned so many and why I don’t own any now. I kept coming back to that wonderful snap to the bass, but when push came to shove and something had to go, it was always the HP-1000. If I could have affored to keep them I would have, but when I kept acquiring new phones, namely the PS-1’s and the GS-1000’s, the HP-1000’s just couldn’t keep up in my opinion and their super crisp palpable bass wasn’t enough to keep them around. In essence, for me, their sound was too thin, too “boring.” I suppose it is a result of not enough of that spectrum tweaking Headroom indicated being necessary for a natural sound.
The PS-1’s were introduced as the answer to the HP-1000’s but with John’s own interpretation of amazing sound. The PS-1’s were initially known as BASS MONSTERS! Incredible amounts of bass, hard hitting, layered, deep, and audible. So many felt it was perfect bass, others found it to be too much. Again, amps came into the equation quickly and with the right amp, the PS-1’s moved me in ways that the HP-1000’s just couldn’t do. First, many jumped to place flats on the PS-1’s. Placing flats on any Grado obviously brings the drivers closer to the ears; it also forces all the sound into the canal and doesn’t provide as large of a space for the bass to disperse. This can create a distorted unbalanced sound if the drivers have not been designed for the pads to be that close to the head. Though the HP-1000’s and RS-1’s/MS-Pro’s were initially voiced with the flats, the PS-1’s were voiced with the bowls and really require them to sound their best. Using the flats creates far too much bass and one not only overpowers the very low end, but muffles the midrange and treble. I fell for this originally and then went back to the bowls for critical listening. Although the HP-1000’s still had a better leading edge and a quicker decay, the PS-1’s bested them in pure hard hitting power. The extended decay, though not too much for me, also meant that in the end, the music had a better body and more PRaT. I did miss and still do miss the attack of the HP-1000’s and I hoped the GS-1000’s would fill the missing gap.
Compared to every other Grado, the GS-1000’s have the most bass, both in power and abundance, that is, if one uses anything but the very large cushions it comes with. Putting flats or bowls on these will completely ruin the sound in my opinion. The bass practically one note, the midrange is muffled and the treble sounds off. With the superbowls, the drivers are moved quite a ways away from the ear, and a large chamber is present for the bass to disperse nicely before getting to the ear drum. Although the HP-1000’s can still lay claim to the best leading edge, the gap has been shortened. The GS-1000’s have a very good attack and the decay is even better than the PS-1’s. One gets nearly the attack of the HP-1000’s a better decay than the PS-1’s, a deeper bass than the HP-1000’s and is at the height of the Grados in terms of layering. I believe these attributes to be among the main reasons for my preference for the GS-1000’s as my main listening headphones over the other ones I own.
The midrange of Grados has always been praised and even though each one tends to be a bit different from their relatives, the overall experience is very similar. No headphone does midrange like a Grado does. Again, the HP-1000’s have the most linear midrange, but this linearity may be more of a perception based on the amount of bass and the treble than the actual response of the midrange. The midrange is a tad dryer than the GS-1000’s and moreso than the MS Pro’s where as it and RS-1’s and sorely lacks in my opinion compared to the PS-1’s. If I had to choose any midrange from any transducer I have ever heard, I would choose that of the PS-1’s. The overall sound of the PS-1’s can usually be described as liquid or smooth, while contraindicatively maintaining microdetails. Even though the midranges are very close, this liquid signature is apparent to me and so I give the edge to the PS-1’s. Still, any of the Grados fair so very well here, heck even the SR60’s. In fact, I wouldn’t say that the SR60’s lose much to any of these big boys. Grados do midrange nearly perfectly for me. Check out a solo classical guitar and you will know what I mean. So this is a matter of grades within an already awesome offering from Grado Labs. YMMV.
The treble, ah yes the treble. There is so much controversy among Grado fans and detractors alike. Some find them bright, some find them perfect. I think Grados do very well in the treble and I think the GS-1000’s do it best when paired with the proper amp, otherwise I would choose the PS-1’s. The treble is well extended on each headphone with more grain coming from the RS-1’s and MS-Pro’s. The HP-1000’s to me, sound more extended than the RS-1’s and MS-Pro’s in most cases, but less so than the PS-1’s and GS-1000’s. The PS-1’s offer the smoothest top end, so very nice to listen to, never a hint of transducer derived hot Ssss sounds yet lacking in the wonderful sparkle of the GS-1000’s. In terms of sparkle, which can most aptly be heard from the shimmer of a cymbal, no headphone that I have heard does it as well as the R10’s. Really, that top end, though bright for me more often than not, has the most wonderful sparkle. The GS-1000’s fall short, not by a lot, but enough to note that the R10’s really are in a class by itself. The GS-1000’s are hard to control up top when not paired with the right gear. The sound can come off as hot with a good amount of Ssss’ from the transducer. Vinyl and the EAR HP4 seem to take care of all of that in my system. I don’t experience this nor do I need to listen at very low volumes in order to enjoy them. I do not find the GS-1000’s fatiguing, but I admit to not having paired them up with much else than my own gear which I have painstakingly tuned for Grados.
Overall, I think the Grados here compete well against each other, but if I could have a perfect Grado considering bass, midrange and treble, I would want the attack of the HP-1000’s, the depth and force of the GS-1000’s, the midrange of the PS-1’s, the smoothness of the PS-1’s treble with the shimmer of the GS-1000’s (or ideally the R10’s). But there is still quite a bit more to sound reproduction than merely the various frequency ranges. There is imaging, soundstage, headstage, body, tone and timbre. A good bit of the essence of music only comes through when we take into account these latter attributes. Not to mention dynamics!
Lately there has been more than a few professional writers claiming that earbuds, ipods and mp3’s as good enough. Those that believe this can stop reading now We are hear because we don’t just want to hear the notes, hear the lyrics, follow the beat, we want to live the music, to pratically breathe it in and survive off of it.
It takes a good setup to recreate this and it takes a very good headphones setup to get it right because of the inherent limitations of headphons. Headphones will never reproduce a realistic soundstage nor will they ever do realistic bass, but they can more than make up for this in the areas of resolution, imaging as well as just sounding great overall.
Among these Grados, macroresolution and overall dynamics isn’t a problem for any of them. In fact, I would be hard pressed to grade them because they are so closely matched. Maybe the GS-1000’s offer better dynamics because of their distance from the ears, but some may argue otherwise. I do believe they do, but it isn’t such a grand rift between the models to justify spending time discussing it. Where there is a large difference is in soundstage and headstage, and the overall sound of the music.
Once again I’ll write a quick blurb regarding soundstage and headstage. I take from Darth Nut who defined headstage as that overall in head experience, where the musicians are prominantly portrayed, and soundstage as the ultimate perceived distance the sound is able to portray. For instance, there are some tracks, recorded in a church, where the musicians may sound as if they are right in front of me, but a held note may sound as if it is going up up up WAAY up to the ceiling and that may be perceived as being 50 ft in the air, even though the performers sound like they are singing directly into my ear. I have always found Grados to do very very well on soundstage dimensions but they lacked when it came to headstaging when listening to large scale acts. In fact, I pretty well give the thumbs up to most open headphones, I have never really felt a closed headphone does soundstaging right, but they can be and often are superior for headstaging.
Back to Grados. Grados with flats = small headstage. It doesn’t matter which Grado, they all sound closed in, the performers are right next to you, dripping their sweat onto your brow, licking your ear and all that good stuff. If it happens to be Ella Fitzgerald in her prime, no problem! If it happens to be Keith Richards from the last tour, well, um…YMMV. Even with flats, the HP-1000’s seem to have a larger headstage than the RS-1’s or MS-Pro’s with flats. The sound axis from left to right seems larger, providing a bigger space and essentially moving the performers back a few steps and maybe the listner, off stage. The RS-1’s and MS-Pro’s are right there in the thick of things, unless bowls are used and then one steps back to front row along side the PS-1’s. The headstage is larger than with bowls and even larger than HP-1000’s with flats, but nothing comapres with the GS-1000’s however which throw the listener back to middle of the hall and maybe back further, enabling the listener to take in a greater abundance of sound, each instrument not just easy to follow along to but the performance as a whole takes on a great cohesion. No Grado can do this as well as the GS-1000’s and unfortunately, throwing on a pair of superbowls won’t transform another Grado into a GS-1000. The bass will get aenemic, the treble will get pitchy and the midrange goodness will be lost in the shuffle. For whatever reason, the last while I have prefered this presentation, maybe because I have been listening to larger scale works, even though I usually tend to listen to small bands or chamber ensembles. If I want intimacy I head for RS-1’s, if I want scale and perspective I put on the GS-1000’s. Still, when considering soundstage, I don’t perceive much of a difference between the RS-1’s, MS-Pro’s and PS-1’s. They all seem to have a wonderful decay of sound as it flows away into the distance. I believe the longer cup aids in this and because the GS-1000’s have the added advantage of the large pads, they even have a larger perceived sound field. It makes for a wonderful change up.
Even given all these aspects of the sound, there is no area that has greater variability for me than in the tone and timbre of the notes. This is where choosing a Grado can have a dramatic effect on the sound. If one is into chamber music, lots of woodwinds and strings, I would highly recommend the RS-1’s and MS-Pro’s. Their wooden cups and tuning reproduces such wonderful and realistic sounds that to this day I have yet to hear a headphone that matches them. Clarinets and cellos in particular sound incredibly life-like, even the GS-1000’s can’t keep up. They aren’t embarassed, because they are very close, but I think the driver was tuned to have a bit less colouration than the MS-Pro’s and even more so than the RS-1’s. The PS-1’s and HP-1000’s don’t fail here, but they just can’t resonate the same way because they are metal. So where they may lose some footing to the woodies, they more than make up for it when electric guitars are heard. Here the metals provide edginess to the sound that contributes just that much more to the realness of the sound. All Grados do guitar well, mainly because guitars are generally well-footed in the midrange, but the metal Grados with their different resonance affect the sound differently and “tuning” can take place depending on the music used. I often tend to listen this way, heading for the PS-1’s for amplified rock, and falling back to the RS-1’s for small acoustic sessions or chamber pieces. I’m lucky, and I know it.
Because of my personal music preferences, I rate the RS-1’s as the top phone tonally for me, with the GS-1000’s closely behind.
I’m finishing up the 11th page here, and I think I may have lost folks 7 pages up. I hope I have covered everything or mostly everything. Again, these are my opinions using my gear.
So a quick roundup in scoring:
[size=small]Bass[/size]
5 GS-1000. The abundance, solidity, layering and depth make this the reigning champ.
4 PS-1. It would have been champ had the GS-1000 not been introduced.
3 HP-1000. Although it loses out in amount of bass, the quality is exceptional and the attack is second to none.
2 RS-1/MS Pro. Though I generally prefer their bass to the HP-1000’s, I don’t know I would rebuy the RS-1’s on bass quality alone, but I did many times with the HP-1000’s.
[size=small]Midrange[/size]
5 PS-1’s. Despite all Grados sounding so close in the midrange, nothing so liquid could lose out to its brethren. PS-1’s for the win!
4 RS-1’s. Because of its overall tone and timbre, that is well suited to my tastes, I rank it above the others, just slightly more liquid and warm as compared to the MS-Pro’s but enough so to place it in the second spot.
3 MS-Pro’s. So close to the RS-1’s but just falling a hair shy for being too dry.
2 GS-1000’s. Better tone and timbre than the HP-1000’s but dryer than the MS-Pro’s.
1 HP-1000’s. Sorry mate, you were meant for the studio, and in these games of high stakes midrange superiority, you come up short. But you are still a Grado, so you demolish all the rest
[size=small]Treble[/size]
5 PS-1’s. Never a hint of shrillness, smooth all the way up. Extended, sublime, wonderful treble. Give me some R10 shimmer and this becomes the best treble around.
4 GS-1000’s. When broken in and controled, the GS-1000 offers speed, sparkle and extension, smoother than the RS-1’s, but loses to the PS-1’s.
3 HP-1000’s. Extended and controled, with no hints of grain. A wonderful treble by any stretch, just not as good as the top two.
2 RS-1’s/MS-Pro’s. Well extended but grainier than the other offerings. Again we are dealing with such small differences, but that is what is expected in a comparative review.
[size=small]Soundstage[/size]
5 GS-1000. No contest, they are BIG and they give a BIG sound.
4 PS-1/RS-1/MS-Pro. They may lose out to their earmuffs of a brother, but they hold their own very well.
3 HP-1000. They nearly make it but they ‘ahem’ come up short where it counts.
[size=small]Headstage[/size]
5 GS-1000. Again, bigger is better here, and the greater the distance from the ears, the larger the headstage.
4 PS-1’s. Designed with bowls in mind, they offer a tad larger soundfield than the other phones.
3 HP-1000’s. Without the bowls, the HP-1000’s generate a larger headstage, but would fall short if the RS-1’s or MS-Pro’s used bowls, but then that advantage would be negated if bowls are used with the HP-1000’s.
2 RS-1’s/MS-Pro’s. With the flats you lose, sorry, just the way it goes.
[size=small]Body/Tone/Timbre[/size]
5 RS-1’s. I’m partial to music that benefits from their construction. Their warmer presentation puts them ahead of the MS-Pro’s.
4 MS-Pro’s. So close but the tweaking makes them better for a studio, and less so for my musical enjoyment.
3 GS-1000. Though a woody, they are voiced to be more linear than either of the reference series styled headphones.
2 PS-1’s. Although the liquid sound and wonderful bass really adds to the body, they are metal, and for me, I love the resonance and colouration of the woodies.
1 HP-1000’s. Neutral. Neutral. Neutral. Sometimes being neutral means sucking the life out of music. This happened one time too many for me. Still, this was only when comparing with the other Grados. Left alone and they would be my top choice.
[size=small]Resolution[/size]
5 GS-1000. As I indicated in the first part of this review, the GS-1000’s are incredibly refined and offer detail extraction like no other Grado. The note separation is a step ahead of the competition here on both a macro and micro scale.
4 HP-1000’s. Though I do believe the other phones have more, it is easier to pick out because of the decreased bass, and so I give the edge to the HP-1000’s.
3 PS-1’s. Some claim these have the same finesse as the Omega II’s. I would agree in most cases but the liquid sound sometimes obscures details when compared with the HP-1000’s.
2 MS-Pro’s. Because of the decreased bass and the cooler sound, they get the edge over the RS-1’s.
1 RS-1’s. Awesome in the overall grand scheme of luxury headphones, but when compared with the best of Grado, they lose out.
[size=small]Overall Score[/size]
Having returned to the video game world, I have noticed that games are scored categorically and then an overall score is provided which is not an mean of the categories. I want to do the same here. Of course this is really just me relating to you what my favourite headphones are but whatever.
5 GS-1000/RS-1/PS-1. I admire them for different reasons and I wouldn’t want to sell any of them. I appreciate the grand sound of the GS-1000’s, the detail and impact. I apprecaite the intimacy of the RS-1’s and that warm tone and near perfect timbre. The PS-1’s offer up one of the most relaxing and enchanting sounds I’ve yet heard, that liquid flow is unmatched.
2 HP-1000’s. Blasphemy to be sure, but their linearity is their downfall for me more often than not.
1 MS-Pro’s. They offer up much of the advantages of the RS-1’s but fall short in areas I prefer. Never quite an RS-1 and not even remotely close to the HP-1000’s. It tries hard but doesn’t do it for me.
So that’s it, it took a while but I hope this will be an enjoyable enough read that it makes up for some of the delay. In the end, it is hard to rate headphones that are so very close in quality overall, but there are enough differences that make it possible. Personally, I don't think anyone can go wrong owning any of the headphones reviewed.
Happy Listening.
