[MakeshiftApe]

Could this lead to a situation where a new headphone B is made by someone who focuses on technicalities, maybe uses only few common productions and more of their own recordings to tweak their headphone, and then headphone B will sound bad with those common productions? Because the A-tweaks aren't B-compatible.

I think it's true that depending on what speakers and headphones a production has been tested on, that'll affect which ones it also sounds best on - that's a given. I mean after all I think that's where the pursuit of "neutral" tuning in listening devices comes from - the idea being that since studio equipment tends to be tuned as neutrally as possible, by using headphones or speakers that are also tuned fairly neutral, you get a closer rendition of "what the artist intended".

But since major productions have multiple people involved and will typically be listened to on a wide variety of devices - from studio monitors, to home speakers, to monitoring/tracking headphones, to reference hifi headphones, to cheap bluetooth speakers, laptops and phones - it's unlikely you're going to see many major record labels putting out things, that only sound good on [x] brand or tuning. You're far more likely to just run into generally poorly mixed or mastered tracks before you run into that issue.

Might be the case more often with bedroom producers. Though actually even in the case of bedroom producers, I think a bigger issue is often that people are primarily using speakers and then have no room treatment, rather than the issue being the tuning of their gear. I've seen a good number of people who spend what to them is a small fortune on nice studio monitors, but have a couple of those silly foam panels off Amazon or no room treatment whatsoever and a room that's got about as much echo as a cave. I reckon someone could probably mix more accurately wearing a pair of Skullcandys or Beats than in some of those rooms with proper studio gear (I'm exaggerating, but you get the idea).

 

[bigshot]

With headphones, it's difficult to calibrate the response so it sounds the same to multiple people. Different HRTF can cause differences in response with headphones, and headphones can vary from copy to copy quite a bit. However speakers in a room with everyone sitting behind the board in the sweet spot sound the same to everyone. I wouldn't recommend using headphones for your primary mixing monitor.

 

[gregorio]

I think it's true that depending on what speakers and headphones a production has been tested on, that'll affect which ones it also sounds best on - that's a given.

That sounds logical and is a common audiophile assumption but in practice it’s not really true. It’s true that the mix will be affected by the monitors but the monitors will typically be both “Mains” and “Near-fields”, with significantly different presentation. Productions for major artists will often have elements made in different studios and lastly (and most importantly) when the mix is finished, it will go to another studio to be mastered. If there is any colouration in the studio it was recorded/mixed that’s found it’s way into the mix, mastering will remove it, that’s the point of mastering.

But since major productions have multiple people involved and will typically be listened to on a wide variety of devices - from studio monitors, to home speakers, to monitoring/tracking headphones, to reference hifi headphones, to cheap bluetooth speakers, laptops and phones

While not impossible, it’s unlikely the mix/master will have been listened to on such a wide variety of devices. A top mastering engineer will have many years experience of carefully analysing numerous recordings on a variety of systems/room and will have tuned their own mastering studio, in combination with training/adapting their listening skills, so that they can create a master with their monitors/environment that will work well on a variety of consumer playback devices/scenarios. Some mastering engineers will do a quick check of their master with some different speakers but others don’t need to.

With headphones, it's difficult to calibrate the response so it sounds the same to multiple people. Different HRTF can cause differences in response with headphones, and headphones can vary from copy to copy quite a bit. However speakers in a room with everyone sitting behind the board in the sweet spot sound the same to everyone.

That’s a naive and somewhat incorrect view of what often happens in practice, particularly with the more major artists. Firstly, everyone does not sit behind the board, everyone is not in the sweet spot and therefore it doesn’t sound the same to everyone. But more importantly, even the sweet spot varies very significantly from studio to studio. This is particularly important because most major artists tend to favour a particular engineer/producer, will often use various different studios and that engineer or producer will have a several different clients. These freelance (“celebrity”) engineers emerged in the 1970’s with mix engineers such as Bob Clearmountain. They’re constantly flitting between different studios, often on different continents and get little time to adapt to the very significant monitoring differences between all these different studios.

The problems you mention with headphones are very real. However in practice, with most of the major artists, there are just as many problems with “speakers in a room” (or rather “rooms”).

In general you are correct, it’s not advisable to mix on headphones and in the majority or vast majority of situations experienced engineers would not choose to do so. However, a very few do choose to mix on HPs and even those who don’t, sometimes run into situations where it is the least worse option or the only viable option.

Clearly, your personal experience does not extend to these workflows/scenarios but obviously, the world is not defined by your personal experience and you cannot state that it never happens or only happens with “non-pros” simply because you personally don’t have the experience. I am a long time pro, have often flitted between numerous studios (in different countries and continents) and have on occasion mixed on HPs, even though I prefer not to and advise students/others not to. My experience alone falsifies your assertion and again, I’ve linked to an article with several top engineers who also falsify your assertion.

Hopefully this will not go the way of some other “disagreements”, where your assertion is demonstrably incorrect but you’ll defend your experience/opinion as applicable to everyone else ad infinitum.

G

 

[vergesslich22]

This thread is informative, I'll re-read it asap. Thanks from my side for the information, among them different kinds of production advice.

I have lost the bit of opinion about things in question, but I'll post when it should come back. Since it was connected to that question about headphone B, the HD 660s, I'm forming my opinion. Specificly this is just that yesterday when reading some more reviews, I found out (remembered) that I somewhat hate V-shaped FRs and prefer the flaw of it being shaped the opposite way, ^-shaped. Maybe that's also what makes a headphone sound like speakers or natural things? Resonances are like ^?

Off-topic:

The thing about the HD 660S is that it is good at showing timings very precisely. The thing where you notice a vibrato, or the phase or a phase of the bass. But IMO it's kind of a bit unnatural to get every detail presented too clearly.

I'm actually talking about dummyhead-recorded headphones, and I have not heard any good headphone for months. But broadly speaking I mean, I just don't want to buy a headphone arsenal. I already have one at the piano, the mp3 player and the computer.

So, there is nothing new in the market for me. I can't see anything that makes sense for me except something that has been existing for a long time. The only thing for me to look for is something like the Apogee Groove. I tried it, but not with any HD 6?? series headphones. :I Btw there is a headfi posting from 2011 saying that the poster believed (some or many) headphone amplifiers were designed with (and therefore for) the HD 600. I was just reminded of this.

I know the HD 600 since 25 years. A bit too bright, exactly right, no phenomenal extension things, cannot do wonders. Boring idea to replace the empty place of my dead HD 600 with a new one, but kind of logical.

 

[sander99]

@vergesslich22: I strongly suspect that your hint at the question whether or not (and which and how) headphones are used in production and the discussion about the same subject that followed are not really where the answer to your main question - what are good headphones for you - can be found.
I think more relevant for you is what @castleofargh mentioned: one and the same headphone sounds different to different individuals for a number of reasons.
And the consequence is: a headphone that is good for someone else, even a headphone that is good for a lot of people is not necessarely good for you.
And the other way round: it is possible that a headphone that sounds odd to a lot of other people, like maybe with a ^-shaped FR as you mentioned, is good for you.
For example your personal HRTF (Head Related Transfer Function - the way sound from a distance is filtered by bending around your head and into your ears) could be such that it filters out more high frequencies than the average HRTF. If a headphone - that skips a part of your HRTF - then blows a lot of highs straight into your ear canals that would be more than you are used to and could explain why it "hurts" your ears.

 

[ExTubeGamer]

There is this song "The Magic Key" by "One-T" which I can't listen to on headphones. I don't think there is a version of it that allows it. The snare drum works great on speakers, but on headphones it doesn't and hurts.

I got curious and tried to listen to this song on my IEMs. The soung sounds completely fine. Nothing unusual, very enjoyable. I do use EQ all the time if I can and thats what makes the difference. So I would recommend reducing the freq youre sensitive to with EQ.