SONY MDR-7506.. mid's feel very loud?
James
not for mixing, but when recording tracks, fixing up individual tracks, etc.
Lots of people told me that these are some of the most widely-used
headphones in lots of different professional recording settings..
Now, whenever I mix I usually run around to different playback settings,
playing the song in lots of different systems. And when compared, the Sony
MDR-7506 sound is sooo heavy in the mid range! They just feel so harsh to
me, the mid's just jump out.
So I'm wondering, is this the way they are meant to be, some advantage to
their sound? Do others feel this way about them? Or is my hearing just
messed up.. OR, is it in fact that all the other listening settings that I'm
using are just too weak in the mid's?
I guess I was expecting that these headphones would give a fairly "neutral"
listening experience.. but they seem very mid-range flavored to me....
thanks
Scott Dorsey
>I've been using a pair of Sony MDR-7506's for quite some time now. Obviously
>not for mixing, but when recording tracks, fixing up individual tracks, etc.
>Lots of people told me that these are some of the most widely-used
>headphones in lots of different professional recording settings..
I find both the top end and bottom end of the MDR-7506 to be severely
exaggerated. This is great for editing, and people who are tracking like
it.
>Now, whenever I mix I usually run around to different playback settings,
>playing the song in lots of different systems. And when compared, the Sony
>MDR-7506 sound is sooo heavy in the mid range! They just feel so harsh to
>me, the mid's just jump out.
Well, that's why you shouldn't use the MDR-7506 (or any other headphone)
to make tonal decisions.
Be aware that since headphones use your ear canals as part of the resonant
system, headphones that sound one way on my ears may sound different on yours.
>So I'm wondering, is this the way they are meant to be, some advantage to
>their sound? Do others feel this way about them? Or is my hearing just
>messed up.. OR, is it in fact that all the other listening settings that I'm
>using are just too weak in the mid's?
I find them anything BUT exaggerated in the midrange. I find them to have
huge pumped up top and bottom. But my ears may not be the same as yours.
>I guess I was expecting that these headphones would give a fairly "neutral"
>listening experience.. but they seem very mid-range flavored to me....
No headphones are neutral. The Sonys are designed to be less neutral than
usual, which is what makes them so great for editing.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Ted Spencer
(which I thought were basically the same thing except for a slight difference
in earcup design) they were very midrange heavy. It didn't make much sense to
me either.
Ted Spencer, NYC
"No amount of classical training will ever teach you what's so cool about
"Tighten Up" by Archie Bell And The Drells" -author unknown
ScotFraser
<< I've been using a pair of Sony MDR-7506's for quite some time now. Obviously
not for mixing, but when recording tracks, fixing up individual tracks, etc.
Lots of people told me that these are some of the most widely-used
headphones in lots of different professional recording settings..>>
They are. Recording & live sound.
<<Now, whenever I mix I usually run around to different playback settings,
playing the song in lots of different systems. And when compared, the Sony
MDR-7506 sound is sooo heavy in the mid range! They just feel so harsh to
me, the mid's just jump out.>>
That's the inverse of the 7506's frequency response characteristic. You should
NEVER do any EQing based on what you hear on the Sony's. Check panning, reverb
levels, detailing, edits, etc, but but DO NOT EQ with these phones. They will
mislead you bigtime.
<<So I'm wondering, is this the way they are meant to be, some advantage to
their sound?>>
For location recording they are valuable for pointing out any potential low
frequency problems, such as traffic rumble, & the hyped upper mids are good
for revealing details that might slip past on speakers, like bad edits,
crunched transients, short overs, etc.
<<Do others feel this way about them? Or is my hearing just
messed up.. OR, is it in fact that all the other listening settings that I'm
using are just too weak in the mid's?>>
No, the problems you mentioned are consistent with Sony 7506 characteristics.
<<I guess I was expecting that these headphones would give a fairly "neutral"
listening experience.. but they seem very mid-range flavored to me....
>>
The 7506's have never been accused of being neutral. That's not what they're
good at. They are good at informing you of potential problems while working
under difficult monitoring conditions.
Plus, they fold up nicley & come in a convenient little stash bag.
Scott Fraser
Mikey
for tracking, and I've used them in lieu of floor monitors when practicing
with my band (with earplugs, yet). They just seem to work in those apps.
Scot is right, tho - Don't mix with them. If you want more neutral HPHs, try
AKG 240DFs, or I'm sure you can get other recommendations here.
Mikey
Nova Music Productions
James <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:ac61qt$3td$1...@netnews.upenn.edu...
Charles Tomaras
video) to the new Sennheiser HD280 Pro's and I'm very pleased with the improvement. They
are just as loud as the Sony's, isolate better, and since they fit over your ears instead
of on your ears they sweat alot less on warm stages and sets.....or studios if you prefer!
Charles Tomaras
"James" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message news:ac61qt$3td$1...@netnews.upenn.edu...
Geoff Wood
! A bit like a C1000 response there - but I still prefer my 7506's to my
K270s, with cound a bit like a plastic cup in comparison.
I can't decide if the massive bass is a good or bad thing, and they sure go
loud....
geoff
"James" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:ac61qt$3td$1...@netnews.upenn.edu...
> Now, whenever I mix I usually run around to different playback settings,
Geoff Wood
"ScotFraser" <scotf...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020518145030.19912.00000065@mb-
> Plus, they fold up nicley & come in a convenient little stash bag.
Yes they tuck up neatly, but they also flip around to some unlikely position
when you least want them to ! A bit like a dropped piece of toast always
landing butter side down ...
geoff
Justin Ulysses Morse
for: They're great for tracking because they're really loud but don't
leak too badly. They can crank up without distorting (unlike 7502s)
and they are forward-sounding so guitar players and vocalists like what
they get out of them when they're in the same room with the rest of the
band.
Also, they seem to work well for digital editing. I like to spend a
lot of time working on the segues between songs (i never fade to
digital black) and they're good for hearing the differences in noise
floor between two adjacent quiet passages.
Ulysses
In article <ac61qt$3td$1...@netnews.upenn.edu>, James <nos...@nospam.com>
wrote:
> I've been using a pair of Sony MDR-7506's for quite some time now. Obviously
ScotFraser
In article <I6AF8.2081$7N.3...@news02.tsnz.net>, "Geoff Wood"
<ge...@paf.co.nz-nospam> wrote:
<< Yes they tuck up neatly, but they also flip around to some unlikely position
when you least want them to ! >>
I've seen some musicians get hopelessly tangled up in Sony phones. Hilarious to
watch.
Scott Fraser
Ty Ford
I like the 7506 for tracking and mix checking. They are one of the few (if
not only) headphones that has a separation between mids and LF. Too many
phones I've heard just mush the mids and lows together.
The 7506 does have a nasty little peak arounf 5kHz-6kHz, but i'll forgive it
for that given the clarity it provides.
Regards,
Ty Ford
Ty Ford's web site is http://www.jagunet.com/~tford.
Check it out for voiceover samples, audio equipment reviews and other stuff.
Ty Ford
<tom...@tomaras.com> wrote:
>From: "Charles Tomaras" <tom...@tomaras.com>
>Xref: news-f.iadfw.net rec.audio.pro:777863
>
>I just switched over from years of 7506 use for location sound mixing (mainly
for film and
>video) to the new Sennheiser HD280 Pro's and I'm very pleased with the
improvement. They
>are just as loud as the Sony's, isolate better, and since they fit over your
ears instead
>of on your ears they sweat alot less on warm stages and sets.....or studios if
you prefer!
>
>Charles Tomaras
Pardon my pinnas, but I tried the 280s recently and was bothered by some
sort of phase or early reflection problem. I found the delay very distracting.
Charles Tomaras
must own something you like.
"Ty Ford" <tf...@jagunet.com> wrote in message
news:D2CB83A008EAF0F6.7CC9A36D...@lp.airnews.net...
Ben Bradley
>I've been using a pair of Sony MDR-7506's for quite some time now. Obviously
>not for mixing, but when recording tracks, fixing up individual tracks, etc.
>Lots of people told me that these are some of the most widely-used
>headphones in lots of different professional recording settings..
>
>Now, whenever I mix I usually run around to different playback settings,
>playing the song in lots of different systems. And when compared, the Sony
>MDR-7506 sound is sooo heavy in the mid range! They just feel so harsh to
>me, the mid's just jump out.
It could be this big resonance I found in them a few months ago
(and this may be in addition to what everyone else is saying: the
response may still be significantly non-flat even when driven from a
low impedance source where this resonance doesn't appear). I recall
posting about it but no one responded.
I was listening to a recording of an LP with lots of scratches, and
wanted to hear a 'different perspective' from the speakers, so I
plugged in my MDR-7506's. The LP clicks I heard through the speakers
became cowbells (!) through the Sony's. I did a little experimenting
and found pretty much what I expected: They have a strong resonance if
not driven from a very low impedance source (which damps the driver
resonance). I use and old consumer stereo receiver for its amp, and
the headphone jack is wired with a 150 ohm resistor between each amp
output and the jack. Experimenting with parallel resistors lowered the
resonance substantially: 8 ohms reduced it a lot, but there was still
a bit if a 'cowbell' sound. 1 ohm made it go away entirely (though I
had to turn up the amp further to hear the signal).
The other headphones I have, AKG K240m (nice, big, open design, I
feel like Art Bell when wearing them...), K66 (cheap, hyped bass, but
ok for 'just listening'), and some small crap "walkman"-type
headphones, don't have this obvious problem, though I haven't checked
them for changes in sound with source impedance.
Are most headphones in a studio environment driven with
near-zero-impedance sources (like speakers are)? I presume that
mixers' headphone outputs and studio headphone amps have very low
(much less than 8 ohms) output impedance, but this is easily messed up
if there's an L-pad 'volume control' between the amp and the phones
(such as driving several sets of phones, each with its own volume
control).
The moral of the story: Drive Sony MDR-7506 headphones with a very
low impedance source (such as directly from a low-power amp).
>
>So I'm wondering, is this the way they are meant to be, some advantage to
>their sound? Do others feel this way about them? Or is my hearing just
>messed up.. OR, is it in fact that all the other listening settings that I'm
>using are just too weak in the mid's?
>
>I guess I was expecting that these headphones would give a fairly "neutral"
>listening experience.. but they seem very mid-range flavored to me....
>
>thanks
>
>
Ben Bradley
>I've been using a pair of Sony MDR-7506's for quite some time now. Obviously
>not for mixing, but when recording tracks, fixing up individual tracks, etc.
>Lots of people told me that these are some of the most widely-used
>headphones in lots of different professional recording settings..
>
>Now, whenever I mix I usually run around to different playback settings,
>playing the song in lots of different systems. And when compared, the Sony
>MDR-7506 sound is sooo heavy in the mid range! They just feel so harsh to
>me, the mid's just jump out.
It could be this big resonance I found in them a few months ago
>
>So I'm wondering, is this the way they are meant to be, some advantage to
>their sound? Do others feel this way about them? Or is my hearing just
>messed up.. OR, is it in fact that all the other listening settings that I'm
>using are just too weak in the mid's?
>
>I guess I was expecting that these headphones would give a fairly "neutral"
>listening experience.. but they seem very mid-range flavored to me....
>
>thanks
>
>
Bill Davis
> > >I just switched over from years of 7506 use for location sound mixing
(mainly
> > for film and
> > >video) to the new Sennheiser HD280 Pro's and I'm very pleased with the
> > improvement. They
> > >are just as loud as the Sony's, isolate better, and since they fit
over your
> > ears instead
> > >of on your ears they sweat alot less on warm stages and sets.....or
studios if
> > you prefer!
> > >
> > >Charles Tomaras
> >
> > Pardon my pinnas, but I tried the 280s recently and was bothered by some
> > sort of phase or early reflection problem. I found the delay very
distracting.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Ty Ford
> >
> > Ty Ford's web site is http://www.jagunet.com/~tford.
> > Check it out for voiceover samples, audio equipment reviews and other stuff.
I've used 7506's for years but I've NEVER considered them anything close
to flat.
The fact that they have that upper midrange BULGE is what I like about them.
I'm usually mixing audio for video so my goal isn't accuracy, but rather
identifying problems in the speech part of the material. That presence
peak really helps identify poorly spoken lines under field conditions. I'd
suppose that for the same reasons it might be helpful for tracking
singers, but if I was trying to find ACCURATE cans, they'd be way down my
list.
Just my 2 cents.
--
Bill Davis
NewVideo
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Ty Ford
>Subject: Re: SONY MDR-7506.. mid's feel very loud?
>Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 10:01:39 -0700
>Ty...I'm gonna make you listen to my Pearl MS-8 through the 280's one of these
days! I
>must own something you like.
Charlie,
I like and respect you and that's all that matters. (Didn't much care for
the Pearls either :0 !!)
geo...@gjhsun.cl.msu.edu
very different..
Ted Spencer
Ok. I certainly liked the V600s a lot better than the guy's 7506s. I've
forgotten how much I spent on them though. Were the 600s supposedly above or
below the V6s in the product line? Or otherwise what was the intended
difference?
Larry Larraga
what some vocalists want when tracking & overdubbing especially. I use
them occasionally when "fixing" (mostly vocal) tracks on DAW. Pops stuff
right out. But "neutral" is the furthest thing from what those cans
deliver, IMHO.
When I want something fairly flat to reference I put on my AKG K-240 DF
"Studio Monitor" headphones. They have "a "diffuse field" equalization
curve that provides headphone listeners with the sound pattern,
characteristic of a room with reflective, non-anechoic surfaces"
according AKG's web site.
Larry Larraga
The Pneumatic Attic
In article <ac61qt$3td$1...@netnews.upenn.edu>,
"James" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
> I've been using a pair of Sony MDR-7506's for quite some time now. Obviously
> not for mixing, but when recording tracks, fixing up individual tracks, etc.
> Lots of people told me that these are some of the most widely-used
> headphones in lots of different professional recording settings..
>
> Now, whenever I mix I usually run around to different playback settings,
> playing the song in lots of different systems. And when compared, the Sony
> MDR-7506 sound is sooo heavy in the mid range! They just feel so harsh to
> me, the mid's just jump out.
> <...>
Lorin David Schultz
>
> I've used 7506's for years but I've NEVER considered them anything
> close to flat.
>
> The fact that they have that upper midrange BULGE is what I like about
> them.
>
> I'm usually mixing audio for video so my goal isn't accuracy, but
> rather identifying problems in the speech part of the material. That
> presence peak really helps identify poorly spoken lines under field
> conditions.
Bill, you know I really respect your opinions, so I hope you'll forgive
me for holding an opposing view again! <g>
I agree with you that 7506 is anything but accurate. I disagree that
the HF rise can help with assessing takes though. A little EQ boost
between 4-6K can really improve intelligibility. That means that HF
rise in the Sony's will actually *mask* muffled takes, by making the
operator believe that what they captured is better than it really is.
--
"It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
- Lorin David Schultz
in the audio booth
making even bad news sound good
Geoff Wood
g.
"Lorin David Schultz" <LSch...@ctv.ca> wrote in message
news:3CEC9DF5...@ctv.ca...
S.Warner
> I agree with you that 7506 is anything but accurate. I disagree that
> the HF rise can help with assessing takes though. A little EQ boost
> between 4-6K can really improve intelligibility. That means that HF
> rise in the Sony's will actually *mask* muffled takes, by making the
> operator believe that what they captured is better than it really is.
Mine just sit collecting dust. No one wants to use them. The faux leather
carrying bag works great for my camera, however.
-Scott (Warner)
Bill Newell
> georgeh wrote:
>
>> It's the V6 which is the "consumer" version of the 7506. The V600
sounds
>> very different..
>
> forgotten how much I spent on them though. Were the 600s supposedly above or
> below the V6s in the product line? Or otherwise what was the intended
> difference?
The V6 is out of production, although the widely-available 7506 pro
version is the exact same thing.
The V600 came out as the V6 was being discontinued, and it is >NOT<
the same thing. Much bigger and more detailed low end, in response to
consumer demand to grossly exaggerate bass in pop/rock material. Mine
are only used for monitoring solo tracks where I want to hear max.
low-end detail; for editing on the PC (not mixing) I use the V6. All
of these models are at the same price point (~$99 street).
Sony also has the V900, which is basically the V600 design with 50mm
drivers, and that exaggerates the low end even more.
The mids are >not< hyped on the V6/7506, it's HF-hyped and slightly
LF-hyped. All of the posts in this thread from people using them a
lot are on the mark. Mine are always connected to very low impedance
outputs, so I've forgotten how much I noticed them resonate when the
impedance is higher, but it's definitely there. If I'm editing on the
PC, or watching video on the PC late at night, I always use them.
They're also handy for silent keyboard/guitar practice.
(bill)
--
I am a software engineer, not a musician.
ScotFraser
news:3CEC9DF5...@ctv.ca...
> I agree with you that 7506 is anything but accurate. I disagree that
> the HF rise can help with assessing takes though. A little EQ boost
> between 4-6K can really improve intelligibility. That means that HF
> rise in the Sony's will actually *mask* muffled takes, by making the
> operator believe that what they captured is better than it really is. >>
They're just like NS10s. You quickly learn what you really have on tape
compared to what you're hearing.
Scott Fraser
Geoff Wood
And the high highs aren't harsh, just the prominant high mids.
geoff
"ScotFraser" <scotf...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020526121406.16566.00000489@mb->
ScotFraser
And the high highs aren't harsh, just the prominant high mids.
>>
Of course I didn't mean they SOUND like NS10s, just that they are similarly a
very inaccurate device that one soon learns how to compensate for.
Scott Fraser
Geoff Wood
NS10s have extra of somethings, and a total lack of other things (low bass).
geoff
"ScotFraser" <scotf...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020529140000...@mb-mh.aol.com...
Jay Ts
> And the high highs aren't harsh, just the prominant high mids.
Since this thread started, I've been listening more closely
to my MDR-7506 headphones, and comparing back and forth with
my AKG K-240DFs and Event monitors, to see if I could come to
some sort of a conclusion about what's going on with them.
This is a somewhat indefinate observation (I'm really not exactly
sure about this), but it seems to me that the Sonys have much
poorer transient response than either the AKG headphones or
the Event monitors.
I've been recording very percussive acoustic sounds, such as
100's of pebbles crashing together, which it turns out produce
a sound that is almost all transients that mix together with
each other. (You should see the waveform magnified in Sound
Forge! Even at 96 KHz sampling rate, it just looks like hundreds
of pulse waveforms thrown together. It is extreme.)
The Sonys are really poor at reproducing the original sound,
whereas the AKGs do a fairly decent job at it. I was thinking,
poor transient response is also characteristic of large diaphragm
condensor mics, which may be at least partly responsible for
their desirable effect on vocals and some instruments, but at
the same time, cause them to be terrible on other things.
Is it possible that this is causing the Sony headphones to
sound good sometimes, but not others? And perhaps causing
a psychoacoustic (or even real) perception of "prominant
mid highs" and other perceived imperfections that people
are attributing to them?
I'm mostly just spewing this out because it seems plausable
to me, and I can't think of any better theory. What do
y'all think?
Jay Ts
Arny Krueger
> Since this thread started, I've been listening more closely
> to my MDR-7506 headphones, and comparing back and forth with
> my AKG K-240DFs and Event monitors, to see if I could come to
> some sort of a conclusion about what's going on with them.
> The Sonys are really poor at reproducing the original sound,
> whereas the AKGs do a fairly decent job at it. I was thinking,
> poor transient response is also characteristic of large diaphragm
> condenser mics, which may be at least partly responsible for
> their desirable effect on vocals and some instruments, but at
> the same time, cause them to be terrible on other things.
> Is it possible that this is causing the Sony headphones to
> sound good sometimes, but not others? And perhaps causing
> a psychoacoustic (or even real) perception of "prominent
> mid highs" and other perceived imperfections that people
> are attributing to them?
> I'm mostly just spewing this out because it seems plausible
> to me, and I can't think of any better theory. What do
> y'all think?
I don't have AKGs, but I do have Sennheiser HD-580s which I think are
more like AKGs than the Sonys.
I have used MDR-7506s for years, and I used the consumer version
MDR-V6 (wore out two pairs) before that. I'm talking from the
perspective of like 20 years of critical listening.
If I have to listen to something in private for intelligibility
and/or enjoyment for like 3 hours, then I pick up the HD-580s.
If I have to check out something I'm producing and make a critical
good/bad decision in 5 minutes or less, I pick up the 7506s.
IME the 7506's are very robust and the HD-580s are relatively
fragile. I've already spent about 1/3 of their original cost
replacing broken parts on the 580s and I've only had them a few
months. I've used the current MDR 7506s nearly daily for years and
they seem to be as robust as ever. But, I will keep replacing parts
on the 580s as long as I can.
People I know who measure headphones tell me that the 7506's test out
very well, but other more expensive phones test out even better. So
its not like the 7506's are egregiously flawed, its like if you spend
more m oney carefully, you can do even better.