Yep it was surprising to me that the three different impedance models MAY sound noticeably different from each other. Or maybe not. It would be interesting to listen to all three and find out.miketurn wrote:@JCJR
Thank You for your response
So it sounds like the lower ohm version may not be as built to last, and the 80s are now even more questionable to me.
...
Beyer to use the exact same model number for all three, why not put the ohm value into the model number at the end, if you are going to make three versions of them. Being the most expensive pair on my list, I would just hate to go with these and be disappointed.
I wouldn't assume that the 80 ohm sounds worse or the other impedances are not built to last. The beyer doc I read just said the 80 ohm is built to tolerate more abuse, at the possible tradeoff of "not quite as good fidelity". But unless you intend to use the phones in abusive conditions, one couldn't automatically assume that the other impedance models won't be durable in non-abusive situations. Dunno one way or the other.
Some of the microphones with squeakiest-clean fidelity can be rather fragile, wheras you can use Shure SM58 or Audix OM5 as a hammer. Just because you probably wouldn't want to abuse an expensive fragile condenser mic doesn't mean such fragile mic is not "built to last". With careful handling they can last a lifetime. Though I doubt there are many headphones which last a lifetime.
Machines can measure distortion more accurately than ears. Sometimes distortion levels below 1 percent can be difficult for ears to discriminate. Speakers have the highest distortion of anything in an audio chain. Even the "best" speakers have lots more distortion than average audio interfaces or average analog or digital effects.
The quoted distortion specs on some of the headphones I've looked at, is lower than typical speaker distortion. I don't know if headphones are generically of lower average distortion than speakers, but it seems possible. Just saying, (fictional numbers used for sake of example)-- A headphone built "rugged" which measures 0.4 percent THD might be 'on paper' higher distortion than a headphone built "hifi" which measures 0.2 percent THD, but compared to 1 to 5 percent distortion in typical "nice" speakers-- Maybe it would be difficult for the typical ear to detect a difference between 0.2 percent versus 0.4 percent distortion headphones. Maybe both would seem "about equally clean" and if the frequency response differs then perhaps it could be a tossup which response would seem most preferable to any random customer.
Also it is not uncommon for people to prefer the sound of devices with higher distortion over comparable devices with lower distortion. This would be in situations where neither device has "guitar fuzz tone" levels of distortion, but even trained ears sometimes like the sound of the gadgets which measure by machine as larger amounts of minor distortion. 1 percent versus 0.1 percent or whatever. Some of the most popular audio gadgets are not among the lowest-distortion gadgets in each category. Not that slightly higher distortion is good in itself, just that people sometimes seem to like characteristics of some devices so much that the slightly higher distortion seems irrelevant (and unnoticed) to the ear.
Everybody has different ear physiology and different audio preferences. Tis hard to work out from user reviews and paper specs. In order for a third party listening impression to be relevant, maybe it would need to be a fella with similar shaped ear anatomy and similar listening tastes.
