what are the most accurate sounding headphones?

[Monk of Funk]

Best bang for your buck, ATH m50s imo. If you YouTube them, you'll find nothing but high praise. 200$

[Ty Ford]

Originally Posted by musicianvw

what in your opinions are the most realistic accurate sounding headphones?

Wow! This almost looks like a troll question. It's like walking down a back alley with a stick and beating the back fences and gates from house to house to wake up the neighbor's dogs. Surely they will each run to the noise and bark loudly to repel the invader.

The choice of your words is intriguing; "most realistic", "accurate".

Compared too what? Compared to music heard in free air or in an acoustically-treated recording studio or relative to the most realistic and accurate monitors. If the latter, this thread will surely continue until the next millennium.

I do like the responses, especially the notion that more and more people are listening on headphones.

I may never use the term "industry standard" again unless it's agreeable that the term doesn't imply "the one and only." Perhaps "an industry standard" is a more precise use of words. In addition, "for what purpose" must be scrutinized. Tracking (where you don't want bleed) or mixing, where bleed doesn't matter as much, each have their place. However, if you're somewhat hearing impaired and are using open back headphones for tracking, you're going to have a problem.

If you ever listened to old movies with ANY headphones, you'd quickly come to the realization that most old movie soundtracks had not been listened to on headphones while being mixed. The mixing stage monitors in major movie post facilities hide a lot of funky little details that are very apparent with any pair of "good' headphones.


Woof!

Ty Ford

[Bob Womack]

Yeah, the reason I used the term "industry standard" is because the AKG240 has survived several trend cycles at this point. I remember the Sennheiser perod and the David Foster Fostex period, the Beyer Dynamic period, and now the Sony 7506 period. In the end, the AKGs have hung in through all of them. By the way, we've got both 240s and 7506s in our studios. Take your pick.

Bob

[Ty Ford]

The 240 went through a very woofy period some years back and after enjoying the first ones, I really was not impressed by them.

I used to use the early ones on the air. When they deteriorated, I sent them into AKG for service. The "did me a favor" and replaced the drivers with the new ones. Yuk! I'm sure they were only trying to help, but the low end was swampy compared to the others. They corrected that a bit with the 270. I have one pair of them. I think they're closed back and not as low end heavy.

They have a switch in the headband designed to turn them off unless they are being worn. A great innovation probably born out of music studios where headphones are left plugged in and someone jacks up a headphone send without knowing what's plugged in and blows them out.

It's sometimes a problem though. People pick up the headphones and before putting them on don't hear anything from them. "Hey, these headphones aren't on!"

"You'll be fine, put them on."

"But they aren't on!"

"Yes they are, just put them on."

"No, they aren't on!!"

"Please just put them on, you'll be fine."

"But..!" (puts them on) "OK, they're on now!"

Regards,

Ty Ford

[muscmp]

Originally Posted by Ty Ford

The 240 went through a very woofy period some years back and after enjoying the first ones, I really was not impressed by them.

I used to use the early ones on the air. When they deteriorated, I sent them into AKG for service. The "did me a favor" and replaced the drivers with the new ones. Yuk! I'm sure they were only trying to help, but the low end was swampy compared to the others. They corrected that a bit with the 270. I have one pair of them. I think they're closed back and not as low end heavy.

They have a switch in the headband designed to turn them off unless they are being worn. A great innovation probably born out of music studios where headphones are left plugged in and someone jacks up a headphone send without knowing what's plugged in and blows them out.

It's sometimes a problem though. People pick up the headphones and before putting them on don't hear anything from them. "Hey, these headphones aren't on!"

"You'll be fine, put them on."

"But they aren't on!"

"Yes they are, just put them on."

"No, they aren't on!!"

"Please just put them on, you'll be fine."

"But..!" (puts them on) "OK, they're on now!"

Regards,

Ty Ford

ty: you forgot, "i keep hearing my voice in these." yes, you are supposed to.

and, put them on with the wire on your left side as that is the left channel. they say, "left?" yes, left.

"i don't like hearing my voice so loud, it bothers me." if i turn you down, you'll say the drums are too loud, just concentrate on singing your best and work your vocals. you are just not used to hearing your voice.

"can i sing with the headphones off?" sure, but we won't be able to record you doing it and you won't be able to hear the song to sing along with.

finally, " wow, i actually did that take very well and even like the sound of my voice." whew!!

play music!

[Ty Ford]

Them too!

Regards,

Ty Ford

[Ivan Lee]

I only know a few Headphones...

AKG240's very nice - neutral unhyped - but open backed = bad for tracking (for me)
Sony 7506 - hyped - not my cup of tea
Beyer DT880 - almost as neutral as K240 and closed back - current fave for tracking
HD-280 -hyped and bright
Senn HD-650 When I was shopping many years ago for what was considered "great" these came up. I like them pretty much but they don't sound like anything I have ever considered reference (ADAM S2A, EPOS11's, Vienna Acoustics Bach series, Martin Logan Summit (my current "BIG" system).
Lastly - I have fond memories of using both the GRADO SR125 and SR225 but never owned them

[KevWind]

The first thing to distinguish is For tracking or for mixing. or are you going to attempt to to both with one pair.

for tracking you want closed back, for mixing open back is fine and in theory not as subject to sound bouncing back. ( albeit room reflections not withstanding, arguably monitors are superior)


If your going to both with one set then in theory a closed back pair with the flattest response curve, you can afford.

I use Sennheiser 280 HD's for tracking, for mixing when necessary Senn. 600 HD's

[Ty Ford]

"Some of the best sounding records of all time were recorded on NS10s."

Revisionist history. I think if you look under the hood you'll find that they gained recognition by being on the meter bridges of a few top end consoles in cover photos of MIX magazine. That sort of set off a wildfire. Yamaha, took it from there.

While they may have been used on the "some of..all time", very likely not as the primary monitors or the only monitors. They just don't have the stuff for that. They replaced Auratones. Auratones were used to provide a worst possible case scenario mixing experience, sort of like Mick Jagger using a single 6" x 9" oval car speaker to check his mixes.

I remember doing a monitor review at Sheffield here in Maryland after they had been out a while. Bill Mueller was still there and after we did what we did in Studio A, he said, "Hey, let's see how the NS-10's compare."

Very nasty and with the vocals WAY out in front. I began to wonder if that was why some music back then came out with buried vocals.

Regards,

Ty Ford

[Monk of Funk]

Originally Posted by Ty Ford

"Some of the best sounding records of all time were recorded on NS10s."

Revisionist history. I think if you look under the hood you'll find that they gained recognition by being on the meter bridges of a few top end consoles in cover photos of MIX magazine. That sort of set off a wildfire. Yamaha, took it from there.

While they may have been used on the "some of..all time", very likely not as the primary monitors or the only monitors. They just don't have the stuff for that. They replaced Auratones. Auratones were used to provide a worst possible case scenario mixing experience, sort of like Mick Jagger using a single 6" x 9" oval car speaker to check his mixes.

I remember doing a monitor review at Sheffield here in Maryland after they had been out a while. Bill Mueller was still there and after we did what we did in Studio A, he said, "Hey, let's see how the NS-10's compare."

Very nasty and with the vocals WAY out in front. I began to wonder if that was why some music back then came out with buried vocals.

Regards,

Ty Ford

I've heard ns10s sounded like garbage and also that they were the industry standard for monitors. I don't get that.

All this money into treating a room, and then bad monitors? idk. seems weird to me.

[Bob Womack]

There was a period when the NS10ms were the go-to near-field monitor by many. Towards the end of the 1980s when it became popular for engineers and producers to hop from studio to studio, it became important to have a reliable, small monitor system that could be made to sound similar in multiple environments. As in the guitar world, name engineers have influence in the engineering world. Bob Clearmountain adopted the Yamaha NS10m for this purpose and it became nearly ubiquitous in the engineering world. They had a tweeter that was overly bright but Bob C. taped tissue over the tweeter to cut that down unitl Yamaha created an update with a more gentle tweeter. Sure enough, a few interviews with them in the background in Mix Magazine and instantly they were everywhere. More HERE. At the studios where I work we picked them up for all our control rooms because some outside engineers demanded them in their riders. None of the staff engineers used them and we didn't keep them on top of our consoles. They are all gone now.

However, not one engineer I spoke to during their heyday actually liked the sound of them - they just allowed some people to get a good mix. I've got a pair of NS10ms with roasted tweeters sitting at home and can't bring myself to spring for new tweeters. I just never liked the NS10m. They just ripped my head off every time I tried to use them. In fact, I was given this pair a couple of years ago after a studio pitched them because no-one wanted them.

Bob

[Bob Womack]

Oh, and the principle behind use of small monitors like the NS10m is as a "balance monitor." That's a monitor that you bring in for the mix phase that allows you some sort of estimation of home speakers. As a near-field monitor it is brought in close to you to reduce the effect of the control room on the monitoring situation. Good engineers don't rely on them alone and many refuse to EQ on them at all. They'll record using wide-range monitors. Next, during the mix phase, they get the basic sounds going with EQ and processing using large monitors. Finally they use the balance monitors to set the final balance of the sounds. It has been done with Auratones (a small monitor system made by a company that Quincy Jones invested in) and NS10ms and now many do it with Avantone monitors.

Bob

[Bowie]

Originally Posted by Ty Ford

"Some of the best sounding records of all time were recorded on NS10s."

Revisionist history.

I take it you're not familiar with the name "Bob Clearmountain"? I started in the industry in the 90's and thought the same as you, that they couldn't have been used in that capacity because they sound terrible. But, I've been schooled repeatedly by many of my peers and have come to terms with it. If you don't believe me, here's a few of the first quotes I found with a quick search of "NS10";

If any piece of pro audio hardware deserves that over-used term "industry standard" it has to be the NS10.

Probably more global chart hits were mixed on these speakers than any other

No one ever writes about the Yamaha NS10 monitor speakers without using the terms “industry standard” and “legendary” somewhere in the sentence. They were in fact the industry standard; but not because they happened to be the best speakers on the market in their day. They just happened to be cheap speakers that everyone just had. And engineers always preferred these because they knew that they could listen to a mix in one studio on the speakers and always know that they were listening to something that could the compared to what other engineers heard in their own studios

That’s why I’ve kept NS10’s since the 80′s in addition to other monitors, and I’m generally afraid of changing monitors. Something has to be an absolute.

They are a standard in the professional recording industry.

I hated them but realized their value when making a "real world" reference and the fact that most of the places I was working at had a pair. I ended up learning how to work on them and while I'd never buy a pair, I feel comfortable working on them because I know how they behave. I never said they were the only monitors or the best, simply that some fantastic music has been recorded through them and I've had the privilege of talking with some of the people who made that happen. I'm not going to try to convince you or anyone else any further, I'll just respectfully disagree.

[Ty Ford]

Jesus Bowie!,

You're like a dog on an old bone. Revisionist history because, as I and Bob mentioned, they weren't used as PRIMARY MONITORS.

Ty Ford

[Monk of Funk]

I can understand if they may not have the bass one would want, and by looking at them, this is what I would expect about them.

But, I thought the whole idea was to get well balanced speakers with a flat frequency response, or as flat as possible, and then mix on those.

That way, whatever, if some speakers have weird frequency curves, then that's their problem.

it's a little odd to me, to get speakers that sound off in order to get an idea of what they would sound like on ordinary speakers.

However, that said, although I don't have a well treated room and super flat monitors and all that jazz, I do this myself.

I mix on headphones actually because I have to, but then I'll listen through other headphones, and through speakers, and will take note of what I hear, and go back to my DAW, and tinker with it, keeping that in mind, but still using my DAW speakers as a judge, knowing that the vocals sound more up front in another set of speakers for example. I wouldn't mix the vocals then, to sound as quiet as they need to be to sound right to me in the other speakers, but I would try and find a happy medium where it sounds pretty good in all speakers I've tried.

I'm not that awesome at the whole mixing thing though for some reason. I "know" quite a bit, but I'm still not that awesome at it for some reason I find.