Monitoring headphone?

[warlock110]

i was thinking of the HD-280 but i realized that i don't need a closed headphone to monitor mixes (ain't recording anything, why need closed headphone for?), so i guess it's w/e is the cheapest that can produce clear sound without coloring or distortion, any ideas?

 

[RAMI]

I think you're going to get alot of people telling you that you shouldn't be mixing with headphones.

 

[Seafroggys]

Actually I've had little to no issue mixing with headphones. Just remember that your bass is gonna be weaker, so make sure to test it on other systems.

 

[MessianicDreams]

i was thinking of the HD-280 but i realized that i don't need a closed headphone to monitor mixes (ain't recording anything, why need closed headphone for?), so i guess it's w/e is the cheapest that can produce clear sound without coloring or distortion, any ideas?

Check BeyerDynaminc DT880, nice clean open-sounding headphones, as well as AKG K171 or K271.


But neither of them I'd class as "cheap".

 

[Robert D]

You don't want to mix with headphones.

But if you did, you wouldn't want to do it with closed back phones.

And, you most certainly wouldn't want to do it with w/e is cheapest that you can get by with.

AKG 240DF is the only cans I've found I can halfway trust to mix with.

 

[midwesttribune]

never want to mix with headphones, headphones are an unrealistic version of what the sound is actually going to sound like out of different stereo systems in cars and environments. I would rather mix on stereo speakers then headphones. I would invest in a pair of monitors, i didn't think i needed to either until i popped the headphones off an listened to it everywhere else. Headphones are good for cutting out specific slight details that you may not even hardly hear in stereo. get monitors

 

[tc4b]

I've mixed with headphones for years because... well, I just don't spend a lot of money on my studio and I'd rather invest in instruments when I do. My bad. See, every time I make a mix, I have to burn a 'trial cd' and listen to it on a few different systems, take notes, then head back to the lab. I'm sure this is a good idea anyhow, but I mean the shit sounds WAY different than I though it did when monitoring through the headphones. My two cents.

 

[RAMI]

never want to mix with headphones, headphones are an unrealistic version of what the sound is actually going to sound like

Absolutely. I'm surprised people still try to dispute that. It's pretty much common knowledge. Or at least it should be.

 

[mharr552000]

Absolutely. I'm surprised people still try to dispute that. It's pretty much common knowledge. Or at least it should be.

I don't think any one tries to dispute it. Some of us just CAN'T use anything other than headphones for one reason or another.
I can only work on my stuff late Saturday night/ early Sunday morning once the wife and kids are asleep. If I get complaints that an UN-amplified electric guitar is too loud I'm thinking the near fields might be too.
I would love to mix with my Fostex 0.5 monitors, but I can't. Now I couldn't even if I had the chance because one of them didn't work the last time I plugged them in, which was about a year ago.
I'm hoping that we don't incure too many more medical bills this year so I can score a good set of headphones for mixing in December. I'm looking to spend about $100. I'll start another thread later this year just to stir up some shit.

 

[ofajen]

I think you're going to get alot of people telling you that you shouldn't be mixing with headphones.

No question that headphones sound different. The perceived soundstage is confined between your ears, while a monitoring rig will produce a perceived external soundstage.

The irony, of course, is that so much music is being mixed these days on monitors and so much of it is then listened to on little iPod style headphones. That produces distortion of the stereo image. Maybe we need iPod mixes? Actually, I think you would need to track with headphone playback in mind to get a better result.

Anyways, sometimes I have to work with phones due to late night SPL constraints with the kids sleeping upstairs. I find that Sennheiser HD580s and HD600s work pretty well for monitoring and the sound translates about as well from them to monitors as any other headphone, but then again, that's not that well.

Cheers,

Otto

 

[warlock110]

i'm doing this for sound reason (night time ect..) also a pair of monitor isn't cheap lol does anyone know the cheapest usable monitor?

 

[Lt. Bob]

Just to be the devils' advocate here ....... I mix on headphones fairly often out of choice rather than neccessity since my Sennheiser HD-650's ( not cheap) with my Headroom headphone amp is flatter and truer than 90% of the monitors we all use.
However, I acknowledge that my headphone rig cost a good bit more than everyones' monitor systems also ... around $1200 for the 'phones and the headphone amp.
I use my monitors too, of course, but there is very little difference in sound between my 'phone rig and my monitors with the exception of the 'phones giving me a bit more fine detail.
Also, the Headroom amps have a propriatary crossfeed circuit that adds the signal that each ear would normally hear from the opposite speaker so that you don't have that 'each ear isolated' thing going on that you have with 'phones usually.
I know that my rig isn't typical for headphones and doesn't really have any actual input on whether most of us should mix on phones or not since most of us won't have a headphone rig that costs more than out recorders but I did want to point out that it is possible to have such a thing.

 

[ofajen]

Also, the Headroom amps have a propriatary crossfeed circuit that adds the signal that each ear would normally hear from the opposite speaker so that you don't have that 'each ear isolated' thing going on that you have with 'phones usually.

I've been to their website before, but I can't seem to see much about this feature. Do they include it on all their headphone amps? Just certain models?

Cheers,

Otto

 

[ofajen]

I've been to their website before, but I can't seem to see much about this feature. Do they include it on all their headphone amps? Just certain models?

Cheers,

Otto

Never mind... I found it. It's a 300 microsecond crossfeed delay option that seems to be available on all their amps. I wondered if they tried to simulate the typical frequency-dependent shadowing that occurs, but apparently not. It seems to get mixed reviews on Head-Fi. Many folks who've tried it don't like it or use it, some like it all the time, some try it on every new thing they listen to just in case and many use it only on older recordings with strong panning of mono tracks. I'd be interested to try it out... perhaps I can simulate it in the box with some plug ins...

Cheers,

Otto

 

[makeasound]

Headphones, Monitors, Near-field monitors...

When mixing it is best to use multiple sources of sound. Here you will find mixing alot easier because you will hear things in one that you hadnt found in one of the others. This is what I've found!

 

[Lt. Bob]

Never mind... I found it. It's a 300 microsecond crossfeed delay option that seems to be available on all their amps. I wondered if they tried to simulate the typical frequency-dependent shadowing that occurs, but apparently not. It seems to get mixed reviews on Head-Fi. Many folks who've tried it don't like it or use it, some like it all the time, some try it on every new thing they listen to just in case and many use it only on older recordings with strong panning of mono tracks. I'd be interested to try it out... perhaps I can simulate it in the box with some plug ins...

Cheers,

Otto

I'm remember that when I bought mine about 5 or 6 years ago, the article about the crossfeed specifically addressed the eq issue stating that the cross feed was a combination of the delay and a high end roll off simulating the eq changes that occur when the sound from one speaker had to pass around the head to get to the ear on the other side. They had specifics but I don't remember them but I'm pretty sure it was some sort of high end roll-off.
But I'm positive that the EQ thing was part of the circuit.
I think they have it on all their amps.
I love the thing .... to my ears, it does what it's supposed to do ..... really nothing more and nothing less. I don't personally find any negatives to it at all. You really basically don't notice it at all ..... the phones just sound more natural.

 

[ofajen]

When mixing it is best to use multiple sources of sound. Here you will find mixing alot easier because you will hear things in one that you hadnt found in one of the others. This is what I've found!

I would agree if by "mixing" you mean the process you use to evaluate how your mixes translate to a range of listening systems. I like to monitor the actual mixing only with the full-range monitors, using calibrated, purposeful gain levels (based on the loudness of the mix) within the clean LEDE environment created by the Attack Wall... a relatively consistent, neutral, sonic microscope. My assumption is that this monitoring system reveals what is there and that it falls roughly in the middle range of all possible listening systems and should produce a reasonable compromise that will translate well to all normal systems (other than ones with extreme bass boost).

Sometimes I have to use the headphones for late night work and I always use my most accurate headphones (the modded HB580s) using calibrated, purposeful levels based on the loudness of the mix. I'm not looking to spend money on a headphone amp, but the crossfeed option does intrigue me.

After mixing, I check how a mix translates by burning a CD, listening with the car stereo, transfer to iPod, etc. But then I'm weird and almost nothing I do is industry standard. Lots of people like to mix amidst the chaos of uncalibrated levels and various sets of monitors stacked up in a big pile in a mix environment with tons of hard reflections and comb filtering. Who am I to argue if they get good results?

Cheers,

Otto

 

[rayc]

The irony, of course, is that so much music is being mixed these days on monitors and so much of it is then listened to on little iPod style headphones. That produces distortion of the stereo image. Maybe we need iPod mixes? Actually, I think you would need to track with headphone playback in mind to get a better result.

I agree but let's take it to the logical - MP3 mixes with mega bass produced by earbuds & with all sympathetics etc sawn off with a digital meat axe. Cool!

I agree with the general trend though - I've used h'phones to mix, (closed back ones I prefer also), do take a CD to a variety of machines, prefer monitors but can't afford them so use stereo speakers etc. etc. Like to use h/phones to listen for detail & early EQ carving as well as a comparison of sound stages (I always worry that I'm going deeaf in 1 ear & need to swap sides - easier with h/phones - to remind my self I'm not & that I'm just a rotten mixer), know ear phones create more listening fatigue as well as having more potential to damage my already tinnitus infected hearing compared to monitoring with speakers. & finally can't imagine mixing with buds to create an MP3 player friendly mix no matter how ubiquitous such things become - OH, when i listen to my cassette walkman, personal CD player or MP3 thingo I use real headphones rather than those silly EQ presets, mega bass & things jammed into my ear canal.

 

[ofajen]

I'm remember that when I bought mine about 5 or 6 years ago, the article about the crossfeed specifically addressed the eq issue stating that the cross feed was a combination of the delay and a high end roll off simulating the eq changes that occur when the sound from one speaker had to pass around the head to get to the ear on the other side. They had specifics but I don't remember them but I'm pretty sure it was some sort of high end roll-off.

From the Headroom headphone amp manuals (Micro thru Max are the same):

"Imagine you are listening to a pair of speakers. If you turn off the left speaker, both ears hear the sound from the right speaker. But because the left ear is slight farther away than the right ear, it hears the speaker’s sound slightly after the right ear; about 300 microSeconds. This time difference is called the “inter-aural time difference” and it is the main thing your brain listens for in order to tell where to place sound left-to-right.

But in headphones if you turn off the left channel, only the right ear hears the sound. In headphones, if there is any sound that is only in the left channel, or only in the right channel, then only that ear hears the sound.

This is not natural, and you brain becomes fatigued trying to figure out where sound is comingfrom when only one ear is hearing it. This tends to create an audio image that is a blob on the left, blob on the right and a blob in the middle. HeadRoom amplifiers cure the problem by allowing you to cross-feed a little of the left and right channels across to each other through a short time delay using the crossfeed switch. The usefulness of the circuit varies depending on what type of recording you are listening to; mono and binaural recordings need no processor at all. Old studio recordings that have instruments panned hard left or right, benefit greatly from the processor. Live and classical recordings miked from a distance benefit somewhat less, and can often be listened to without the processor quite comfortably."

So the current Headroom Amp manual doesn't refer to the EQ and shadowing effects, only the timing effects. Of course, the crossfeed circuit may still have an EQ component that is undocumented. I will point out that we locate primarily by arrival time up to about 700 Hz or 800 Hz (where head diameter is at least a 1/4 wavelength). When you get into higher frequencies, the shadowing effect gets big and our hearing relies more on inter-ear volume differences, which is why the EQ effect should also be important in creating a real stereophonic image.

Cheers,

Otto

 

[Lt. Bob]

And I guess it's possible they've changed the circuitry for some reason. I'm positive that they had the EQ dealt with in mine ...... that's the only reason I knew that there was such a shadow effect though it's obvious once pointed out.
If they've changed it then that's a good reason to keep this unit forever.