Sennheiser 580 vs. Ultrasone 2000G's???

[jokerjkny]

anyone wanna comment on these headphones? the 580's seem to be everyone's top choice, but the ultrasone's seem to be sneaking up there.

 

[LSchefman]

I haven't heard the Ultrasones, but they got a very lukewarm review in one of the pro audio rags.

 

[Sebastian]

I actually liked what I heard of the Ultrasones at AES on San Francisco. I tried all of them, and they sounded decent, although a trade show floor isn't the best place for critical listening. I think I'm just going to buy a pair and see what they're like. It's worth the risk to me.

Haven't used 580s, but I do have a pair of 280s, which are too bright for me. I only use them when I need a pair of closed cans. Otherwise, I use a pair of Grados right now. One of the lower end of their line, but it sounds great for the price.

 

[jzucker]

The 580s sound incredible but have incredibly low output. I found them unuseable with either my Mackie Mixer or the headphone output on a Delta FW410 interface when trying to overdub a distorted guitar track along with a backing track.

 

[jokerjkny]

hey jack,

yea, that's the only thing worrying me about the 580's. dont feel like splurging on an Indigo card either.

 

[LSchefman]

>>Otherwise, I use a pair of Grados right now.<<

I've used a pair of Grado HP 1000s for at least a dozen years, and I love them. I don't track with them, I use them to check my mixes.

For tracking I like sealed phones.

 

[Macaroni]

I've got the Sennheiser MD600s and they are fantastic! The 580s are supposed to be very close to the 600s. Perfect for checking mix details, and I let the musicians who are doing overdubs use them for better clarity during tracking. No problems with levels either, using the headphone out on my RME Multiface, or my headphone mixer.

I've recently read a number of posts/reviews on other sites about the Ultrasones and have only seen rave reviews. The HFI-650s seem to be the ones to go with, since the 2000s don't use their special technology (S-Logic?), which apparently makes a big difference in spatiality. I'm hoping to check them out at NAMM this month. I'll let you know if I do.

I know most people are against mixing with headphones, but with the MD600s, it's a completely different world from Sonys or AKGs (which I also have). I do mix with my Dynaudio BM6As, but since lots and lots of people listen to music on iPods and other earphone type devices, I believe it's important to hear how your mixes translate on headphones.

 

[Wing]

Check out headfi.com for more information about headphones than you ever wanted to know. The 580s are good but after a while especially as they age, you will notice a treble rolloff when compared to other headphones. The forums talk of an upper mid dip in the response of the phones. I have a pair of HD 600s which have a better matched version of the 580s drivers. These phones also need serious amplification to sound their best. I have a modded MG Head tube amp driving them. I just ordered a pair of HD 650s, and I'm hoping they would sound even better.

 

[jokerjkny]

Originally posted by Macaroni
(...)

but since lots and lots of people listen to music on iPods and other earphone type devices, I believe it's important to hear how your mixes translate on headphones.

interesting point...

 

[LSchefman]

I agree that headphone listening is increasingly important.

Also --

Checking your mixes with headphones will serve as a double check to ensure that room acoustics didn't fool you.

 

[Macaroni]

I agree that headphone listening is increasingly important.

It's certainly a trend that is growing at a significant rate, with no end in site for the foreseeable future.

Checking your mixes with headphones will serve as a double check to ensure that room acoustics didn't fool you.

Thus further validating the need for excellent headphones.

I find that editing/comping is much easier/quicker with headphones, since you can focus on subtle details much more accurately. Then mix on the monitors, and check the mixes on the headphones during & after.

 

[LSchefman]

This is the lukewarm review I was referring to. Quoted from Pro Audio Review. They also reviewed the 550, which they said lacked highs, and the 2000, which they liked more.

<<The HFI.650

Priced at $299, the HFI.650 is similarly sized sealed headphone as the 550 with a gold-colored back, but it contains a metal driver. It boasts a slightly extended frequency response but is 10 dB less efficient (93 dB SPL). It was just as comfortable as the HFI.550, but the sound was noticeably different.

The HFI.650 has a high mid/treble peak that makes it seem punchy and bright -- too bright with some kinds of music. For accurate mastering and mixing work, it would not be my first choice of the three, but it should be good for a tracking headphone where isolation and punchier high end are needed to cut through the clatter; drummers might like them because of the isolation, but prerecorded cymbals sounded a little too hard for my taste.<<

Kinda lukewarmm, like I said.