dalethorn

i-device update: I still don't have the iPhone 5 (may wait for the 5s), but got another step closer today with other items. Previously, I was able to test the new iPod Nano against the old iPod Touch and iPhone 4s which use the 30-pin connector, and found that the Nano's analog out to a headphone amp via the LOD (which bypasses the i-device volume control) is louder than the older i-devices by perhaps 3 decibels. Plugging the headphone directly into the headphone jack of these i-devices, the Nano's maximum volume that way was also greater than the old iPod Touch and iPhone 4s, by about the same amount (~3 db). Today's tests with the new iPod Touch had the same result. All tests were with the 18-ohm Sennheiser Amperior and the PA2V2 headphone amp, except when the headphone was plugged directly into the i-device headphone jacks. EQ and other optional settings that affect music and video sound were turned off. The interesting thing for me are the reports that the iPhone 5's maximum volume output is less than the iPhone 4/4s (and presumably the iPods), yet the other new i-devices that share the Lightning connector with the iPhone 5 have greater maximum volume, not less.

The DT48's will last 500 years or more, so people who get samples years from now may be able to fix the changes Beyer made with the newer earpads. Maybe I will become a ghost and get to see some of those discoveries way in the future.

Yesterday I checked Innerfidelity's frequency response measurement of the UE6000 in Passive mode and compared it to the Sennheiser HD800. Compared to the HD800, the UE6000's treble is down** the following amounts: -6 db at 3khz, -7 db at 4 to 5 khz, -11 db at 6 to 7 khz, and -9 db at 8 khz. The HD800 has a fairly strong treble that's not excessive, so at 6 key frequencies from 3 to 8 khz, the UE6000 is down an average of 8.5 db. Is that a lot? Yes, but it might be even worse. If you have a sample that varies from spec by 3 db (which is probably generous for a product with an iffy QC record), if you add a variance of 3 db to that you're then down an average of 11.5 db, which is very bad. If you subtract a variance of 3 db from that then you're only down an average of 5.5 db, which isn't quite as bad. And that's why it's important to have a tight spec, plus not be far off from a reasonable high fidelity standard, so the variances don't kill your sound. And it probably explains most of the review differences. **For example, if the HD800's output at 5 khz is 6 db lower than its average midrange output and the UE6000's output at 5 khz is 9 db lower than its average midrange output, then the UE6000's output at 5 khz is down 3 db relative to the HD800. Last thought: I don't know where Innerfidelity's UE6000 sample measurement falls among the samples being sold now. If their sample had treble output greater than the average sample, then the lower-than-average samples would be down twice as much as I speculated on. For example, you'll see in the All Measurements PDF that some of the famous brands which have measurements of two or more samples sometimes vary greatly in the measured responses.

Per a user suggestion, I updated the list to add a price column and a second list sorted by manufacturer and model.

I hope someone finds this interesting - a list of my 30 most recent headphones and their deficiencies or deviations from neutral sound that I had to accomodate to make them enjoyable for hi-fi listening. http://dalethorn.com/Headphones_Top_30.txt Edit: I didn't mean to exclude other manufacturers not listed, but these are all I've purchased so far.

A quick overview of i-Devices including a new Nano with the Lightning connector, how it performs with analog headphone amps, and speculation about digital capabilities with the new connectors. http://youtu.be/6oNqmJ4PLCE

Got the new Lightning to 30 pin cable tonight, to connect the new Nano to analog headphone amps. The sound from Nano to cable to FiiO LOD to amp is exactly the same (using Shure 1840 to test) as iPod Touch to LOD to amp, except the Nano output is perhaps 2 db stronger. Both of the connections I described completely bypass the i-device volume control. Interestingly, with the Nano to Lightning to LOD to amp, you can still see the volume slider on the Nano screen and the Nano's buttons change the slider position, but no changes get through to the amp. This is a good result.

I got my first 'included' Earpods with the new iPod Nano yesterday. No Apple controls, lighter bass, more treble. Not a huge difference, perhaps 2 db difference on each end. I don't know if this is going to hold up consistently in production, but since the first Earpods were already treble-happy, more treble is not good. Side note: One review site was reporting that the new iPhone 5 had significantly less volume output than the iPhone 4, and while I can't verify that, the new iPod Nano has every bit as much volume, dynamic range, and sound quality as the year-old or so iPod Touch. New iPod Nano first bug: I loaded 2 groups of video clips, about 100 clips, less than one(1) gb total. When the headphone is not connected each video in the first group plays at normal speed and each video in the second group plays at double speed. All were recorded off of DVD's on the same computer to iPod format using the same demo software. When I plug in the headphone the latter videos play at normal speed.

If you bought a headphone that changed by 20-30 db with burn-in, that would be unimaginably poor quality. Tyll's tests at Innerfidelity showed a 1 db change maximum, but I could allow 2 db myself - no more than that. But answering your question directly, no - after a couple weeks of play time, no change.

A review of my new (old model?) HD-280 Pro, a nice headphone with very cheap earpads. http://www.hifiheadphones.co.uk/forum/head...one-review.html Youtube video: http://youtu.be/kn8HaQtdFsU

I did send them an inquiry about getting replacement parts like the detachable cable or earpads, and they said "Nothing is available."

A trip to the Apple store tonight changed things. Their 6000 sounds good in passive mode, which means I have two defective 6000's in a row.

That's definitely not for me. I can use bassy only if turning the bass down results in an excellent bass like the Philips L1 or Logitech 6000. Most bassy headphones if you turn the bass down it's no good. For treble, the ATH M50 and B&W P5 and Amperior are a little weak, but tolerable. The vmoda M80 and Logitech 4000 are not tolerable without a boost. But many treble shy headphones cannot be boosted without making the highs too harsh. So until I can hear the new Senn I will have to wait.

So far I haven't heard that they are a really great sound, so I don't know. It seems like it could be one of those bassy things. They sure didn't do too good with the HD700. But I spent $350 on this one, so Sennheiser made good from me.

Since Innerfidelity apparently made the Logitech 6000 their favorite closed headphone in Passive mode, I did a direct comparison to the v-moda M80. The M80 absolutely kills the 6000 in Passive mode. The M80 has a soft treble and the 6000 sounds like a blanket is over the speakers. The M80 has a neutral bass with a strong bottom end, and the 6000 is boomy beyond belief.

Here's the Youtube video, with some info that's not in the text review. http://youtu.be/c39JATw5HU8

Here's a short summary: The best sound I have ever heard. http://www.hifiheadphones.co.uk/forum/head...one-review.html

From what I hear, Innerfidelity got 2 sets of the UE-4000 (from where I don't know), and had problems on the left side with both sets. Reduced bass, increased distortion. So I tested mine with deep bass and mono tracks, and listened to each earcup with the left ear (to eliminate any left-right hearing difference). The UE-4000 design allows each earcup to be placed evenly on the left ear, so differences there won't be a factor. My left and right drivers were within one decibel of each other. I don't remember buying any headphones in the past 2 years (about 30 sets total) that had significant differences between the left and right, although there was one brand and model of headphone, very low-priced, that had significant sample-to-sample differences.

And the Youtube video review: http://youtu.be/VoMsP9BlVBo

You can add to that the unusual driver like nothing else ever made since. In the world of large loudspeakers, there are electrostatics and there are some really advanced horn systems that are extremely efficient. I see the DT-48's as more like a high quality horn system, and you just can't understand the thrill of it until you've heard one properly set up (horn speakers, or DT-48 headphones).

Click on the reviews here and read the review by 'Audiophath' where he mentions electrostatics. That's the key to understanding the world of DT-48. But I agree that the SR-009 wins on technicals. Unfortunately I was not able to find a more ideal earpad for my DT-48's, to get a smoother sound. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/2720...Headphones.html

Here's my text review of the new UE-4000. http://www.hifiheadphones.co.uk/forum/head...one-review.html

And here is the Youtube review: http://youtu.be/81z-emridm4

The PA2V2 finally ran down today after 27 days of use. The past 10 days I was thinking, since I use it daily for at least 3 hours, the battery was never going to run down, so I left it on 24/7 for those 10 days and it finally started breaking up. So it's very efficient when the power is on but not driving a headphone, yet whatever power conservation tech it uses has no tendency to lag when a signal is applied.

It's worse than I thought. Not only the 6 khz peak, but the bass is choppy, which doesn't make sense - it's as though the headphone were on only 95 percent of the time and off 5 percent of the time. The battery is strong - no interruptions there. There is the normal smooth rolloff (more or less) above 10 khz, until I get to 15 khz. For some odd reason the Parrot Zik has a huge output at 15 to 17 khz, and probably above that too but 17 khz is pretty well my limit.