Click to view our Accessibility Statement or contact us with accessibility-related questions
Showing 1 of 7818 conversations about:
sheldonyong
3
Dec 22, 2016
bookmark_border
iCeOL8TRAmnesia
132
Dec 22, 2016
bookmark_border
sheldonyongBeyerdynamic is not known for bass and saying dt880 has more bass than HD6XX? Are you crack smoking in your mancave?
sheldonyong
3
Dec 22, 2016
bookmark_border
iCeOL8TRAmnesiaBeen months since I used dt880 after losing em in my mancave but from what I remember the bass is stronger as in the "tup" sound on dt880.
Smoking some real shit down here with hd6xx
Smoking some real shit down here with hd6xx
iCeOL8TRAmnesia
132
Dec 22, 2016
bookmark_border
sheldonyongHD6XX(650s) are known as some of the most bass heavy hi-fidelity headphones on the market that are considered on the "Classics" bang for buck and overall popularity line. Beyerdynamic are known for highs and ruthless resolution but the bass especially the deep bass is always considered lacking.
Varholiaglimp
939
Dec 22, 2016
bookmark_border
iCeOL8TRAmnesiaSometimes it's useful to try to imagine what people are hearing instead of relying on what's considered (or even measured) to be correct; i.e., what qualities a listener is associating with bass that would make them hear headphones with lighter bass as heavier.
One example: Sometimes a decrease in emphasis in the midrange can focus the listener's attention on the low end, which is one strategy used by companies that design detailed V-shaped headphones: They can create the impression of more bass by accentuating it without muddying the lower mids (since they're recessed).
My theory is that sheldonyong might be hearing a shift in the entire frequency range, which brings out certain qualities in the bass for him. Either that, or he's using an amp that's better at handling the DT880s' load (depending on what it is, which he hasn't told us).
Conventional audiophiles used to say that accurate bass is heard rather than felt, but telling people they shouldn't feel bass is like insisting they they haven't had a real orgasm unless they can remember it. No point in invalidating their pleasure in the name of exactitude (not that sheldonyong seems to mind new input).
One example: Sometimes a decrease in emphasis in the midrange can focus the listener's attention on the low end, which is one strategy used by companies that design detailed V-shaped headphones: They can create the impression of more bass by accentuating it without muddying the lower mids (since they're recessed).
My theory is that sheldonyong might be hearing a shift in the entire frequency range, which brings out certain qualities in the bass for him. Either that, or he's using an amp that's better at handling the DT880s' load (depending on what it is, which he hasn't told us).
Conventional audiophiles used to say that accurate bass is heard rather than felt, but telling people they shouldn't feel bass is like insisting they they haven't had a real orgasm unless they can remember it. No point in invalidating their pleasure in the name of exactitude (not that sheldonyong seems to mind new input).
iCeOL8TRAmnesia
132
Dec 23, 2016
bookmark_border
VarholiaglimpNo, thats all wrong, what a waste of text.
Varholiaglimp
939
Dec 23, 2016
bookmark_border
iCeOL8TRAmnesiaI'm skeptical when someone who doesn't express their thoughts clearly describes someone else's thoughts as meaningless. I can't be sure they're interpreting the other person correctly, have good reasons for their opinions, or have said whatever it is they're trying to say.
Here's what I think you might be saying: "Your argument is completely wrong, so reading your post was a waste of time." (Though if you're attacking someone's argument, simply saying "your argument sucks" is an ineffective strategy. You're better off explaining why their argument doesn't work.)
I just noticed a two-page post by you about cable construction on this very thread, so I'm guessing you've got a better rebuttal in you and a detail-oriented POV.
About your earlier post: there's no such thing as "ruthless resolution." Used as a synonym for definition, resolution can mean an unforgiving (i.e., error-exposing) degree of detail, but resolution itself isn't actually cruel. Resolution isn't pursuing an agenda by any means necessary.
The problem with using that synonym at all in an audio context is that resolution means something else to musicians, audio engineers and consumers. In digital recording, resolution is tied to bit depth, which is why engineers rarely talk about it in any other sense.
Here's what I think you might be saying: "Your argument is completely wrong, so reading your post was a waste of time." (Though if you're attacking someone's argument, simply saying "your argument sucks" is an ineffective strategy. You're better off explaining why their argument doesn't work.)
I just noticed a two-page post by you about cable construction on this very thread, so I'm guessing you've got a better rebuttal in you and a detail-oriented POV.
About your earlier post: there's no such thing as "ruthless resolution." Used as a synonym for definition, resolution can mean an unforgiving (i.e., error-exposing) degree of detail, but resolution itself isn't actually cruel. Resolution isn't pursuing an agenda by any means necessary.
The problem with using that synonym at all in an audio context is that resolution means something else to musicians, audio engineers and consumers. In digital recording, resolution is tied to bit depth, which is why engineers rarely talk about it in any other sense.
Related Products
Drop Refurbished
Like-new products you can trustDrop Rewards
Get $5 for every 500 points you earn! Learn more
Drop Keyboard Club
Become a member and expand your keycap collectionCollaborate With Us
For Brands & DesignersFollow Drop
My ears are j***ing off in my man cave
EDIT: using a govibe dac/ amp box to power this