Really quite expensive headphones - thoughts, advice?

Megii

A while ago, thanks to advice received on this forum, I purchased some Philips Fidelio X2 headphones. I use them mainly with a Cambridge Audio Dacmagic XS dongle/dac thing and listen to music files and stuff on the net from my laptop. Have to say the headphones sounded amazing to me on first listen, and still are a bit of a wow, leading to me listening to a lot more music than I used to. They cost me about £150 on Amazon (seem to be around £200 or more now, but I'm not sure they are still being made).

But (if it is a but) as part of the process of choosing the headphones, I seem to have got into the habit of watching several headphone reviewer channels on Youtube, and this has put the thought of spending even more dosh into my head. Maybe something like the Beyerdynamic DT 1990 Pro, at just under £400, or one of the planar magnetic models that are getting raved about. And probably I'd have to invest in a better headphone amp/dac setup.

So, should I talk myself out of the idea? - I do like an awful lot about the sound the X2's make I have to say, and it's still significantly better than anything I had previously hifi-wise, so perhaps why change what works? On the other hand, sometimes one doesn't know what one is missing. So interested if anyone with experience has thoughts on this, especially those with experience of the serious, audiophile, hi-end headphone stuff, cheers.

spark240

Hey dude...theres a thread here somewhere about my Focal headphones which I won last year, they retail about £1200 so pretty high end...I went onto buy an Astell & Kern DAC and all sounds great...dont get me onto Hi res audio....

So....are they £1k better sounding then yours....well probably not as sadly the outlay is not directly relative to the uplift in quality...though Im sure you would notice a difference...if its better or not is a personal choice.

I went to a high end audio shop and tried another pair of Focal at more than twice the price for comparison, and honestly I could not tell the difference...and I use headphones a lot.

I did demo the Focals to some folks at work and most of them didi actually say they sounded pretty amazing, but then most of them have been using earbuds generally.

Check them out below - any questions just ask ;-)

strtdv

I'd imagine at some point diminishing returns will set in

spark240

strtdv said:

I'd imagine at some point diminishing returns will set in

I doubt it needs to be imagined....

Megii

spark240 said:

Hey dude...theres a thread here somewhere about my Focal headphones which I won last year, they retail about £1200 so pretty high end...I went onto buy an Astell & Kern DAC and all sounds great...dont get me onto Hi res audio....

So....are they £1k better sounding then yours....well probably not as sadly the outlay is not directly relative to the uplift in quality...though Im sure you would notice a difference...if its better or not is a personal choice.

I went to a high end audio shop and tried another pair of Focal at more than twice the price for comparison, and honestly I could not tell the difference...and I use headphones a lot.

I did demo the Focals to some folks at work and most of them didi actually say they sounded pretty amazing, but then most of them have been using earbuds generally.

Check them out below - any questions just ask ;-)

£1200 is really in the seriously expensive, and no doubt seriously hi-end territory I have to say - too much for me to contemplate to be honest. I'm sure they sound amazing, and Focal is a brand I've seen that crops up in some of the Youtube reviews. I'll certainly look at the link anyhow, just because I'm most interested, and cheers.

strtdv said:

I'd imagine at some point diminishing returns will set in

spark240 said:

strtdv said:

I'd imagine at some point diminishing returns will set in

I doubt it needs to be imagined....

Indeed, I agree, I'm sure at the £150 to £200-ish point I'm already in the territory where diminishing returns is very much a thing, and it would be easy with a bad choice to spend significantly more and not get the gains hoped for.

Stuckfast

I've tested and reviewed a lot of pairs of headphones through work, and it's an odd sort of market.

Some manufacturers have a 'family sound' -- for instance most of the models in the Audio-Technica ATH range sound pretty similar apart from the open-backed version, and likewise all of the AKG open-backed phones sound very similar to each other. In those cases there definitely are diminishing returns that set in as you move up the range. For example I don't think the ATH-M50x sound all that much better than the ATH-M40x, and the ATH-M70x actually sound worse to me. I'm not sure the higher-end AKG models really offer that much over the K702s either. All the Ultrasone phones I've ever tried have been painfully bright.

Other manufacturers are all over the place, like Sony who make some really nice models and some horrible ones.

Some super-high-end models really are great, like the Audeze phones and the AKG K872. I really like the Shure SRH1840 as well. But there are also more affordable models that are good too -- my main headphones are a pair of Oppo PM-3s that I think are now discontinued, but were only ever £300 or so in the first place.

Some high-end headphones need a serious amp to drive them properly, though these are increasingly rare as manufacturers recognise that everyone's listening on phones and laptops.

So all I can suggest is that you try out a few different models, being sure to match the volume very carefully when you switch between them.

ROOG

+1 for the Oppo PM3's, marketed as a headphone for 'music on the move' they sound good to me. Sadly and as Stuckfast says they were recently discontinued, but you might still find a few pairs about.

Danny1969

Stuckfast

Some high-end headphones need a serious amp to drive them properly, though these are increasingly rare as manufacturers recognise that everyone's listening on phones and laptops.

So all I can suggest is that you try out a few different models, being sure to match the volume very carefully when you switch between them.

This can be an issue .... some low impedance headphones need more current driving capability from the head amp .... higher impedance headphones will need less current but a greater voltage swing to get a good  loud listening volume.

The output on most devices is generally either a dual opamp or in the case of laptops \ phones a small class D chip. Neither will show any expensive headphones in their best light. Especially in the bass region. I've designed and built a lot of headphone amps for myself to improve this. If using a decent USB DAC with integral headphone output though this should be less of a a problem

Megii

Thank you for the replies and knowledge - I understand re the "house sound" thing, what I like about the X2's is the somewhat emphasized deep bass response (very good for open back cans), and the wide, spacious sound stage. And I would say the upper frequency response is about right for my tastes also - very occasionally (depends on the recording) it can seem a little sibilant or harsh, but I can eq down a db or two when that happens, (somewhere around 8/9 Hz). Overall they have a very listenable, smooth but involving kind of sound though - by my previous standards they are pretty detailed too, but what I hear in reviews is that there are more "audiophile" options that bring out more detail (Beyerdynamic DT1990 for example). Maybe the bass on the X2s could be a bit more resolved/tight, although again it's great compared to anything I used previously, perhaps I would say just a tad loose, certainly not woolly/muddy or anything.

But in the end, maybe I'll stick with the X2's - some of the options being suggested above are out of my price range - I guess I was thinking if I could find something clearly better for up to £400ish I might jump, but perhaps to get a significant improvement I'd need to spend more - diminishing returns and all that.

Stuckfast

Definitely check out the Shure SRH1840s, they are about the 'flattest' headphones in their price range in terms of frequency response but still sound very musical.

From your description it sounds as though you might also like the AKG open-back phones, which always seem slightly 'scooped' to me, and with a somewhat larger-than-life stereo field. I prefer something a little bit more analytical myself but they are a lot of fun to listen to.

Megii

Stuckfast said:

Definitely check out the Shure SRH1840s, they are about the 'flattest' headphones in their price range in terms of frequency response but still sound very musical.

From your description it sounds as though you might also like the AKG open-back phones, which always seem slightly 'scooped' to me, and with a somewhat larger-than-life stereo field. I prefer something a little bit more analytical myself but they are a lot of fun to listen to.

Shure SRH1840 sounds very interesting, I'll look into that one, cheers. I've heard some flat-response headphones described as "boring" sounding - for me, headphones need to have that musical, involving aspect. The X2s are generally described as having a V shape response, aimed more at enjoyable music listening than accurate, flat response, mixing/mastering type use - some people seem to look down their noses at them, but I like them a lot. But maybe something like the Shures would be better for certain music types, and compliment the X2s, which to be honest I doubt I'd ever want to sell.

I have looked at the various AKG's with interest, especially the K712 pro, which some say is similar to the X2 - perhaps a bit more detail resolution, and a little less bass. Also there is the older K612 which I've seen for less than £100 lately. But these may be a bit of a sideways move, though I'm sure they have their strengths.

SouthpawMark

Shure 1840's are great, but they're open back, and pretty loud for those around you. I ended up going with the 1540's, which are pretty much identical other than being close backed.

Winny_Pooh

The Senn HD600 have a good rep. But above and at that price I'd buy a used set of studio monitors. 

Megii

SouthpawMark said:

Shure 1840's are great, but they're open back, and pretty loud for those around you. I ended up going with the 1540's, which are pretty much identical other than being close backed.

Understood - I'm more of an open-back fan myself - I do my listening generally at home and don't have to worry about annoying other people.

Winny_Pooh said:

The Senn HD600 have a good rep. But above and at that price I'd buy a used set of studio monitors. 

Fair do's - I know the hd600 are a classic, but I suspect they wouldn't be my personal cup of tea somehow, from what I read and hear. For studio use, I'm sure you're spot on re the monitors, but I'm really talking home listening, primarily to enjoy music.

Megii

Nobody own or have tried the Beyerdynamic DT 1990 Pro? or any of the planar magnetic headphones - Monoprice M1060, Hifiman Sundara, etc. ?

Rocker

The best headphones I ever heard were Stax electrostatics.  They have their own energiser box. Seriously expensive but it is like listening to music being played right in front of you.  Very little of the usual 'music in your head' sound that most headphones give.  To say the experience is memorable is to underplay the experience.

But to return to the question posed by the OP, some years ago I coined the phrase "AudioBliss" to describe a listening experience when the sound seems perfect.  Cost is not a factor here, everything you hear sounds perfect.  Change some component in the system and you upset the delicate balance that is AudioBliss.  So if the OP is happy with the sound of his system, leave it as it is and listen to and enjoy as much music as he wants.  If it sounds good, it is good.  Trust your own judgement and enjoy what you have.

If the OP grows dissatisfied with the sound, the only course of action is to put together a new system from the ground up and attempt to create AudioBliss 11.  Never easy second time around and it will cost more.  A lot more.

Winny_Pooh

Megii said:

SouthpawMark said:

Shure 1840's are great, but they're open back, and pretty loud for those around you. I ended up going with the 1540's, which are pretty much identical other than being close backed.

Understood - I'm more of an open-back fan myself - I do my listening generally at home and don't have to worry about annoying other people.

Winny_Pooh said:

The Senn HD600 have a good rep. But above and at that price I'd buy a used set of studio monitors. 

Fair do's - I know the hd600 are a classic, but I suspect they wouldn't be my personal cup of tea somehow, from what I read and hear. For studio use, I'm sure you're spot on re the monitors, but I'm really talking home listening, primarily to enjoy music.

I have a pair of Neumann KH120s at home for all listening and they are beautiful

beed84

Take you Fidelios along with your headphone amp to a local hi-fi shop and test them against more expensive models. My prediction is that you'll walk home proud with what you currently own; and if there is something that happens to sounds "better", the difference will be so insignificant the money-to-better ratio won't merit the additional cost.

FWIW I've never felt the need to replace mine and I've had them about 5 years.

Megii

Rocker said:

The best headphones I ever heard were Stax electrostatics.  They have their own energiser box. Seriously expensive but it is like listening to music being played right in front of you.  Very little of the usual 'music in your head' sound that most headphones give.  To say the experience is memorable is to underplay the experience.

But to return to the question posed by the OP, some years ago I coined the phrase "AudioBliss" to describe a listening experience when the sound seems perfect.  Cost is not a factor here, everything you hear sounds perfect.  Change some component in the system and you upset the delicate balance that is AudioBliss.  So if the OP is happy with the sound of his system, leave it as it is and listen to and enjoy as much music as he wants.  If it sounds good, it is good.  Trust your own judgement and enjoy what you have.

If the OP grows dissatisfied with the sound, the only course of action is to put together a new system from the ground up and attempt to create AudioBliss 11.  Never easy second time around and it will cost more.  A lot more.

So, am I dissatisfied with the sound? Or am I happy? Good questions - I think I'm probably happy to be honest. For me, there is a lot to like about the X2's - they have a certain something that might be very hard to replicate. I guess I'm kind of wondering if there's something "the same, but even better", which it seems very possible there isn't, without spending a lot more. I perhaps listen to a couple of hours of music or more on many evenings, which I never did before I got these headphones, and that has to say something.

@Winny_Pooh I'm sure the Neumann monitors must be lovely - headphones is what I'm thinking about at the moment though, so that's one for another time I reckon. Cheers for mentioning them though, always useful to learn about such things.

beed84 said:

Take you Fidelios along with your headphone amp to a local hi-fi shop and test them against more expensive models. My prediction is that you'll walk home proud with what you currently own; and if there is something that happens to sounds "better", the difference will be so insignificant the money-to-better ratio won't merit the additional cost.

FWIW I've never felt the need to replace mine and I've had them about 5 years.

Well, not sure Grimsby has anything corresponding to the description of "hi-fi shop" but I take your point. I would be interested to compare the Fidelios with the Beyerdynamic dt1990s some time, just to see. But there is a certain something about the sound from the Fidelios that I would be loath to loose - I guess we both know what that certain something is, even if hard to describe. I am more than ever grateful for your original recommendation for these cans, having had them for a while now, and especially since they seem harder to come by lately - they may not be what some people consider "proper hi-fi", being tuned for listening enjoyment, rather than a flat response, but they do seem to suit me very well. So I guess I don't really sound like someone who is very desperate to "upgrade" after all.

robgilmo

Megii said:

A while ago, thanks to advice received on this forum, I purchased some Philips Fidelio X2 headphones. I use them mainly with a Cambridge Audio Dacmagic XS dongle/dac thing and listen to music files and stuff on the net from my laptop. Have to say the headphones sounded amazing to me on first listen, and still are a bit of a wow, leading to me listening to a lot more music than I used to. They cost me about £150 on Amazon (seem to be around £200 or more now, but I'm not sure they are still being made).

But (if it is a but) as part of the process of choosing the headphones, I seem to have got into the habit of watching several headphone reviewer channels on Youtube, and this has put the thought of spending even more dosh into my head. Maybe something like the Beyerdynamic DT 1990 Pro, at just under £400, or one of the planar magnetic models that are getting raved about. And probably I'd have to invest in a better headphone amp/dac setup.

So, should I talk myself out of the idea? - I do like an awful lot about the sound the X2's make I have to say, and it's still significantly better than anything I had previously hifi-wise, so perhaps why change what works? On the other hand, sometimes one doesn't know what one is missing. So interested if anyone with experience has thoughts on this, especially those with experience of the serious, audiophile, hi-end headphone stuff, cheers.

The slippery slope in search of audio nirvana, there comes a point where different sounds better, and different costs a fortune because how could better be cheaper. So you are thinking that something costing twice as much is somehow better, when in fact its really just different. Buy some EQ, that way when you want different it wont cost you anything.
And remember, it will only ever be as good as the recording. So , what ever you do , dont google ''TAS list''

Rocker

@Megii curious about the type of music files you listen to.  Most audio formats [FLAC etc.] use some form of compression to limit file size.  FLAC files are about 45% the size of the WAV files but the FLAC player opens up the compressed files to their original WAV format.  So you are hearing the full recorded signal when listening to music stored in FLAC files.

Smaller sized files are compressed with a computer algorithm 'decision' to remove what it deems as unnecessary information in the WAV files.  When these files are played, they cannot give you the full WAV sound as some or a lot of information has been stripped out.  Permanently.  Generally though highly compressed music files [small size] sound more vivid and more in your face when listened to on the in-ear buds which have a very limited dynamic range and usable frequency response  [the things supplied with mobile phones, iPods etc.] but if the music is compared to the uncompressed version on good headphones and/or a good hi-fi system, the limitations of the highly compressed files become glaringly obvious.  High levels of compression music files have their uses though, in a noisy environment as in a car, the reduced dynamic range helps the music sound overcome the car/road noise.