Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (
More info?)
Greg M. Silverman wrote:
> I need to get headphones for both monitoring and recording, in
> conjunction with an mBox. I was warned that unless the headphones
were
> super-aural open, then I may have feedback problems when used with a
> microphone.
>
> Should I get seperate headphones for recording and for monitoring
> playback, or are there any decent headphones that can function in
both
> situations?
Yes, get separate headphones. "Supra-aural" means on-ear, these are
ridiculously uncomfortable to me. Open means more accurate sound, but
at the expense of cue bleed, and yes you can get feedback with these.
The on-ear types will still bleed, even if closed back.
You need circumaural (over-ear) closed back for tracking. Sennheiser
HD280 Pro are decent, not hyped, and with advertised 32 dB attenuation.
They do a good job of minimizing bleed, but are not really accurate
(but none of that type are AFAIK). I'm getting ready to try the new
AKG K271 for this application, maybe they are a little more accurate,
but they're more expensive than the HD280.
For rough mixing/playback reference, the AKG K240DF are excellent.
Circumaural open-back, wide open sound, very comfortable and pleasant
to use. The "DF" means Diffuse Field, supposedly to mimic open field
monitors a little better. In my experience they are very close to the
sound of my monitors, I can switch back and forth without huge tone
shifts.
But, the 240DF need a lot of power. They are inefficient and high
impedance, so without a good headphone amp they will sound weak in the
bass, and will not have much volume. I use a Hafler 230 watt amp to
drive mine, works great <g>
Some folks like the Grados, Koss, etc. But those kinds of "music
listening" headphones will tend to sound good on many things, and not
always give enough uncolored accuracy for monitoring. So, now you need
three pairs
😱
Steve
/www.lectrosonics.com
Facebook
Twitter