Damage

Couple of Additions: Sony MDR-XD200: By far, one of the better sub $30 headphones. It outclasses anything that Sony offers at or below $30. Absolutely top of their class with clean SQ and fairly wide soundstage. Its vocals are a bit Babs like in their nasalness and they are quite large to consider for portable use. However, you can do much worse than these. For $30, you can't do much better than these cans. KOSS 60ohm Series: Lot of folks like the 60ohm (Titanium?) drivers used in various KOSS/RadioShack by KOSS headphones. They include the well reknowned (but stuck in the 80s stylings) Porta Pro, Porta Pro 2, Sporta Pro, KSC-35 and KSC-75, and some RadioShack branded phones (PROKTX1 I think, it's $20 this month). The cheapest go for $20 (the clip-ons) and are widely considered the best bang for the buck. My impressions with the Porta Pro 2s were average at best, but the housing used for these vs. Porta Pros/35/75s may make a difference. If you're the type that's very rough with your gear, you may want to consider the KOSS as your supplier, they're honoring 20+ year old headphones for repair under their program!!! Panasonic-HJE50s Go Here for my impressions of these, they have replaced the EX71s as my favorite semi-canal buds. Finally, filing this under surprising synergy: The RH910s have some good synergy with Cresyn earbuds. I have one (iRiver branded that came with the IMP350), and the RH910 sounds pretty nice with these stock buds. You may need some Radio Shack foamies to get proper seal on these however.

All I have to eat is: KFC buffalo nuggets (yuck) Shin Ramen (too lazy to cook) Ice Water... I guess I'm having Ice Water. I ran out of my Little Debbies.

I'd get one... except the Fry's here has two (count 'em, two!) DH10P/S. I'd get a DH10P/S as well... Except the Fry's here are charging the full price for these suckers... And I don't have enough cash to get one. Maybe next month.

One quick reply about testing in MONO mode: it does have its advantage that the output to both left and right channel is equal. In that case, you can quickly tell if there is an imbalance in your headphone for example. So you really shouldn't dismiss it as useless outright. Of course, with all the channel specific sound output files (for testing surround systems), one can easily argue that this is useless.

Right now, yea? Me, nothing... I have nothing to eat at the moment.

I guess no one likes free donuts here. May as well close the topic. Hope you enjoyed the donuts everyone.

That's possible. It's known that the ATRAC decoder chip has had enough processing power to decode MP3 as well, and does in the D-NE line of PCDP (since 2003) and Clie PDAs. I thought I saw a post or such confirming that fact from a third party chip provider. I own a RH910 and can confirm that this behavior exists, though my ears have trouble picking it out. But it is there on the RH910 as well. It could be presumed that the DH10P and RH710 may hsre the same problem. DH10P may be less exacerbated due to the use of HD Digital Amp... But no one here has one, AFAIK. Unless Ishii got one in the meantime.

As far as we know, the bug's present in all RH units (save RH710 since no one has one here).

Or it could be MP3Gain thing, in reverse. It can definitely be done in software if need be.

But there isn't concrete proof that its intentional on Sony's part either. If it was, you should expect to see the same behavior throughout the entire Walkman line of products, not just the HiMD units. After all, if Sony wants to say that "hey ATRAC is superior," why not carry this across for the HD1/3/5, the NW series, the PSP, and the D-NE series? Until you have proof that someone from Sony directed that MP3s on HiMD must be crippled in one way or another, you can not say the poor output is intentional. For all anyone knows, it could be intentional. However, you haven't provided proof that it was planned as such, and the only thing we know true to be at this moment is that MP3 playback is buggy. As a side note, the MP3/Atrac3 player in Clie was buggy out of the box, introducing noise to the output. That was fixed with a patch. I don't expect the same from the Walkman side of the line, but at least some sort of acknowledgement that there is a bug would be nice. Finally, I should've made myself clearer, my initial point no. 1 about the roll-off behavior was regarding the RH units, not the MP3 itself. The point about my original post was that you can't necessairly infer from this that this behavior was intentionally programmed into the firmware or a bug... Which is the point of my whole post to begin with...

MD: SP, and some models, MONO mode (some models). MDLP: SP, LP2, LP4, MONO mode. NetMD: Same as MDLP. SP via SonicStage only for Downloading only units. HiMD (NH series): PCM, HiSP, HiLP, 48kbps (via USB only), all MDLP/NetMD Modes. Does not record in Mono, IIRC. Can record HiMD Formats (PCM, HiSP, HiLP) on HiMD formatted disc AND Can record MD Formats (SP, LP2, LP4) on MD formatted disc HiMD (RH series): Same as NH series on playback plus MP3. Can only record in PCM, HiSP, HiLP. 48kbps, LP2/4, and SP via SonicStage only. Unit can only record onto HiMD formatted disc in HiMD mode. Note on Line-Out: To say that the 2nd gen HiMDs or RH series lacks a true line out is correct, but that can be said for most modern MD Players/Recorders. That doesn't stop you from taking the same steps, but since the line-out toggle is no longer there, it involves few more steps.

1. The roll-off behavior is consistent throughout all MP3s, regardless of encoders. 2. That roll-off can be somewhat corrected by using EQ. 3. You can not necessairly infer that roll-off behaviour is intentional or unintentional. If it were intentional, I'd expected it to be lot worse and to not be correctable via a simple EQ setting (ala HD series). Frankly, you have other options if you want MP3 on a Sony hardware (PSP, PCDP, Network Walkman, etc). RH is a MD player first and foremost, so I'd be more concerned if there was a playback error with ATRAC files vs. MP3s.

Quickly off top of my head: LAME (various versions, but I think most uses 3.92) Fraunhoffer (the Windows default encoder in part uses Fraunhoffer encoder, this would include things like SonicStage, WMP, etc.) There are MP3 programs that can identify the codec used to form the track as well. Those are the two I can think of off top of my head that's used in most of the mp3s out there, with some stragglers still using either XING or BladeEnc. Hmm, now that's most of it I believe. Easiest way to confirm that it exists is to record a level signal (or what not) across various bitrates (inc. VBR), and do the analysis as done previously. All it would take is time and patience. Good to know that my hearing is becoming more tone deaf then ever.

Mind you, not all MP3s are affected by this. At least with my RH910, some MP3s sounds fine and unaltered, and others exhibit this strange roll-off behavior. The only thing I can pin it on is the encoder used on each of the MP3s. The only thing I can think of to track this down is to see which encoder (LAME, Fraunhoffer) does this. It should be easy enough. Take your favorite song from CD, encode one with Fraunhoffer, the other with LAME, in various bitrates and see if you can spot the ones that exhibit this behavior.

Did anyone notice that's even with the MP3 playback, there's a variation on individual track level? That some tracks exhibit this roll-off and others do not? Someone want to tackle this bit and see if that's true or am I just hearing things?

I'll let this image do the talking for me. Only good this friday:

No objections from me. If I ever get around to it, I'll take pics. If I ever get around to it...

Because no one asked for it, here's my thoughts/reviews on the Panasonics RP-HJE50s. If anyone is aware of my listening preferences, or have kept track of my posts here, the Orange Board (aka T-Board), and Minidisc.org's Forum, then you're probably aware that I'm usually the first to come whenever someone bashes the EX-71s. And those usually had good reason, since most of the negative opinions were usually initial quality (where EX71s are at their weakest). Out of curiosity, I picked up a pair of Panasonic RP-HJE50 earbuds at a local Circuit City for $30. I had little to lose, since that Circuit City also had EX81s, which I had my eyes on for a while. The King is dead. Or at least, very mortally wounded. The Panasonic RP-HJE50s is presented quite nicely from the start. In its nice clear plastic box, you can see the earbuds and nearly all of included accessories, which are: Small, medium, large tips (1 set each size) Extension Cord Felt Bag with draw string The entire driver housing is somewhat reminiscent of the the EX51 housing, except it's more squarish in shape rather than bulbish. In your hands, they feel quite solid and sturdy, maybe tad on the heavy side perhaps. Entire buds are white save for a little chrome trim. This includes the flanges as well, and this is one of its downfalls (more on this later). Finally, for remote users like myself, the cord setup is exactly like the EX71s, though the cord length between left and right bud is quite longer than the EX71s. However, one of the biggest key difference between the EX71s and the HJEs are the diaphgrams used by each phones. Where as the EX71s use a thicker paper like material with a pinhole in the center, the HEJs use a very thin, translucent membrane. One can also assume that the drivers are most likely different between the two. So, given those two key differences, how do each stack up against one another? Procedurals: MZ-RH10/NH1 -> RP-HEJ50s, accumlated about 20-30 hours of playback. All things considered... One could assume that they would sound fairly similar to the EX71s given all of the similarities. In fact, the tips/flanges are interchangable between the two, each has three holes on the outside of the buds, each has a little chrome accent, etc. And for the most part, they would, right? Not necessairly. Let's assume for a moment that everything is equal between the two, and there was one thing that separated them, other than the sticker price. That one thing is the vocal representation, and it's very crucial here. The HEJs have a vocal that's much more forward, much more louder, and much better represented overall vs. the EX71s that makes the choice between the two almost a no-brainer. It's almost like listening to a karaoke version of a song vs. the same song with full vocals. Sure, it's nice to sing the song yourself. However, in the end the song sounds better with its original performers. Or it does, in my case. However, not everything is equal, and HEJ does things better than EX71 does in other areas too. Would you like more impactful and visceral bass? You got that with the HEJs. Given a nice bass track, the HEJs' bass has that body shaking bass that is only equalled by the XD-400; a considerable feat considering that the latter is a full sized semi-open headphone with driver that's nearly 5x bigger then the HEJs. Trebles seemingly isn't this sets cup of tea, though all things considered, they are almost equal to EX71s (though it is noticably less sibilant from the get go). Even with some Equalization to boost the trebles, they don't seem quite... all there, I suppose. But in the overall scheme of things, this is something of a small quibble. The final SQ works in favor of the HEJ50s, in that it is well suited for portable listening (that it is bass and vocal friendly) and casual application. Not to say that the HEJs are perfect. For one, these are much more microphonic than the EX series, almost to the level of Shure E3s (hmmm... things get decidedly interesting now, don't it?). The flanges are much thinner and flimsier than the EX tips. Thankfully, the two are interchangable, so you can use whatever floats your boat. Construction seems a bit shoddy, the left driver's diaphgram was loose when I purchased mine (and considering exchange, but I doubt it). Back to the point about its microphonics and seal. I noted that these are very microphonic/stetheoscopic. Almost like Shure E3s. In fact, the seal on my left ear is very reminiscient of how Shure's feel in my ear, that there is a much stronger and better seal. But the right driver doesn't exihibit that effect at all. So, it's a question of construction now. And in this case, the Sony wins all over the Panasonics. There's no argument about it here, Sonys are constructed and balanced physically much better than the Panasonics. I'm willing to chalk this up to a statistics on this one however, you'll get a bum unit every now and then. So, what does one get for $30? Overall, a very good set of entry canal phones. It's certainly better than its competitors in the similar price range, the Maxell's $15 special notwithstanding (wait for that one folks, I'll get around to it). In fact, it's enough to make me swear off the EX71s for a long long time. Which is no small feat in and of itself. Addendum: Insult to Injury The first set has been exchanged for the second set. The good news is that the diaphgram on the left driver is sealed properly, and the worries of a small piece of paper residing in my ear canals is now gone. Unfortunately, the crappy QA team at Panasonic China strikes again! The right driver housing this time falls apart as so much as I look at it cockney-eyed. Not quite, but when I exchanged the tips several times, the housing separated by itself. Looks like I may need to apply some very small and controlled dabs of super glue. If you're harsh on your headphones, I will not recommend these at all, at least not until some of the kinks have been worked out. No amount of SQ can make up for crappy construction and quality. Further Insult to Injury For a set of remote cans, they don't work as well with a set of remotes. The left driver is subject to the pull on the remote more so than EX71s ever were. This creates the imbalance on the seal on each ear. In turn, this creates an imbalanced sound which drives me up the wall. Considering that I use the remote quite a bit with my gear, I don't know if this will bug me enough to consider a return, but all remote users, be aware that this issue exists. The Good: Very balanced sound, including a forward and louder vocals and much more visceral bass. The Bad: Trebles seems slightly off.. The Ugly: Quality Control? What Quality Control!?!

Google "Battery University" for info on how to take care of LiIons. Since the NH1 uses fuel gauge along with a LiIon, an occassional full discharge is necessary to recalibrate the fuel gauge on the NH1. Do that once every 30-40 full charges (or 60-80 half charges, etc.), or once every two to three months depending on usage to recalibrate your gauge.

Panasonic's HEJ50 canal-buds come in the short cord style. Also sounds much better than EX71s. And comes in white. Did I mention it's $20 cheaper? There are drawbacks though, the tips are incredibly thin and flimsy, and they are tons more microphonic/stethoscopic than the EX series.

I wouldn't say that. The NH1 has (in the manual, at the very least) similar recording time as NH900 with the AA Battery pack (I think the difference ends up being about 2 hours or so in HiLP mode...). You do get diminished playback time, but for recording purposes, especially stealth recording, your best option is to go with NH1. I also recall NH1 having on the fly level adjustment, whereas the NH900 doesn't. Remember in the US, the NH1 is the only official way to obtain a RM-MC40ELK, which works wonders on all HiMD Units. Should be noted that the 40ELK loses out in functionality on some of the other devices, such as the current generation of PCDPs. If nothing else, the NH1 makes one helluva fancy pocket watch as well.

Stop the unit during playback (to be sure) to set the clock. The contrast adjustment feature refers to the RM-MC40ELK's contrast, not the on-unit LCD. Both can be accessed by accessing the menu from the remote (holding down the jog wheel for a sec), then scrolling down to OPTION in the menu.

Please post all hardware trade inquiries to Classified Section in the Marketplace. This section is limited to HiMD to HiMD trades as outlined in the ground rules posted here. Closing/Moving Topic.

For reference: RH910's 113 (Aka "Regional Code") for US is 20, not 21. That maybe the same for RH10 as well, since changing the RH's 113 has similar effects (A0 puts it in Euromode, 24 Japanese with no editing mode). I also suspect the 114 bit has to be changed in conjunction. For reference, the 114 on RH910 is 80.

I still need to do a comprehensive review for these and XD200, but briefly (or not), here's my rundown of these vs. the CD580s and V6s (similarily priced cans from Sony, the CD580s being replaced by the XD line). Here's the original post from Head-Fi, reposted here for your convenience, troll free: ---- These are bare basics of my impressions of putting the two side by side. I've been using until recently, the CD580s as my main home-lounging cans. They serve that purpose well, but compared to XD400s, I think the 580s are outclassed by the 400s. In certain areas, the 580s does a better job (most notably the vocals, where the XD400s butcher things I think). Unless otherwise noted, my samples are tested in the following config: MZ-RH910 (both MP3 and ATRAC3plus Files) -> Monster Cable iSplitter -> XD400 & CD580 or V6. For the testing purposes (quick and dirty), XD400s remain in MUSIC mode. XD400 vs. CD580 Having a splitter means that I can go back and forth and come to a conclusion on phones rather quickly, spot differences and such. I'll note the usual, with SQ being the last: Comfort: Both are rather comfortable, each having its own way of auto-adjusting the headband. While both are light and comfortable, the XD400s are noticably lighter. The CD580 takes the cake here because of its cloth/faux-velour padding vs. XD400s odd angled drivers and pleather padding. Should be noted that both 580s and 400s have angled drivers, but the CD580's padding makes the whole affair much more comfortable than 400. Handling: XD400s are by far easier to drive and will not require any sort of amp for even the wimpiest portables. CD580s on the other hand, are noticably hard to drive, and may require an amp for best results. SQ: Overall: I think I like the overall presentation from XD400s, though the CD580s are a good set, with better vocals on the CD580s over the XD400s. On the other hand, the XD400s does pretty much everything else better, and does more to envelop users in a more musical experience vs. the CD580s. Bass: The bass impact on the XD400s are much more cleaner and tighter on the XD400s vs the CD580s. CD580s bass is less impactful, less detailed, less controlled, and possibly flabbier... Hard to put it in words, but XD400s does a better job, I think. Vocals/midrange: Vocals do suffer greatly vs. the CD580s. I did get used to the nasalness of the XD400s vocals, but switching one from another, I noticed that it's still there. Instrument details are better presented in the XD400s, whereas I think the CD580s are fudging things just a little bit... Trebles: Again, the XD400s present more detail here, to a point where some may consider them overly bright. Feels like there's more detail to the 400s, whereas the 580s are presenting things on a bit of a darker (maybe colder is better word for it) basis, with some of the "details" masked. Soundstaging: XD400s sounds much more wide open, but there's some problems with certain instruments. Cymbols and such present themselves right above my head, which becomes at times, very disconcerting. Vocals are slightly more forward on the CD580s vs. the XD400s, where it's presented slightly behind the head of the listener. Despite these odd soundstaging, XD400s does a better job enveloping the listener in the overall music presentation. ---- So, here's part two of the cage match, the XD400 has thus far performed very well vs. the CD580s in most areas. To recap, the CD580s has more natural, less nasal vocals whereas the XD400 has that twinge or touch of the nasal vocals. However, the XD400s has better bass impact, mroe detailed (brighter) trebles, and wider soundstage. That said, the XD400s has some trouble presenting certain instruments in odd places. Overall, I thought that the CD580s has been supplanted by the XD400s in teh same price range. Couple of notes and pieces. The XD200s reminds me a lot of CD580s. I wonder if the drivers used in the XD200s are similar to those of CD580s in a cheaper packaging? If so, you got a great bargain on your hands, or Sony's got a stockpile of those CD580 drivers. Either way, the XD200s are a great sub $30. Now, then, here's the venerable V6s, some people like (me to a point a while back) swore by these as one of the best sub $100. Quite a few professional places uses these as monitors during vocal recording (see my avatar). And they do double duty as a pretty decent set of home cans. Now, let's see how these two match up. Since you know what I think of XD400s by now, I'll focus on V6s and their major differences vs. the V6s. The setup remains the same as the last time: MZ-RH910->Monster iSplitter->V6/XD400. I know the splitter changes things ultimately, but for these kinds of compare and contrast, they are very handy. No Equalizer applied, XD400 remains in MUSIC mode. Various MP3s have been used, ranging from Japanese Pop to Movie Soundtracks. Like last time, SQ comparison comes last, after we cover the basics, such as Comfort, seal and isolation. Unamped, so the V6s are probably at a disadvantage here. Ah, regarding isolation, both XD400 and CD580s don't provide a great deal of isolation. However, the V6s offer a great deal more. The cups do clamp against your ears, so a quite a bit of noise gets blocked out. However, I can still hear my keyboard clicking and clacking. TV background noise, PC fan noise, etc are blocked out well enough. V6s work well when you need some moment of silence, but they're no IEMs or NC phones. By Contrast, the XD400s uses more of a "nuclear option" to noise blocking with volume. At a loud volume, most noises will be blocked by the sound from the drivers. At same volume levels, the XD400s do worse job in letting in noise from the background, somuch so that it almost sounds like a set of open cans... Which they're not. V6 wins in isolation. Comfort Both uses the same pleather padding, so it attracts sweat, oil, dirt like a magnet. V6s has a bit of a grip or clamping action against your ears, and will probably hurt those of us with larger lobes. Thankfully, mine fits inside perfectly. The biggest things about V6s though, you're aware that they are there all the time, the headband does force down on your scalp more so than the XD400s or even the cheaper XD200s. V6s are much heavier than XD400s, from the cord to the cans itself. And the twisted cords on the V6s can not be easily managed vs. straight cord on the XD400s. Both trap heat, so they're not good for summer usage or those of us with hot ears. Overall, the XD400s are much better on comfort. Handling Like a broken record, the XD400s win on this level. Sound Quality Bass: Both represent bass in the recording well. Having said that, the V6's bass does lack the visceral impact on the XD400s, but may represent bass more tighter and cleaner vs. the XD400s. In fact, I think the XD400s has less control on the bass here compared to the V6. Looser and more impactful vs. Controlled and tighter, but lacking quite a bit of the impact. Fun vs. Techinical if you want me to boil it down. It's a push here. Vocals: V6s are much more forward on the vocals, more proper, and correct on its representation. Much less nasal, but grainier in some places, and as some have noted, easy to pick out poor recording or recording errors. Again, I think it boils down to Fun vs. Techinical. Vocals are much more forward soundstage and presentation wise. However, the XD's are at their weakest in vocal presentation (nasaly, odd placement). I can live with that, but I do prefer the V6s or CD580s' vocal abilities. Trebles: V6s has been accused of being bassy, boomy, one-note wonder, and bright and shrilly. The first three accusations may have some leg to stand on, but my V6s (well into several hundreds of hours of use now) are not bright. The XD400s are brighter than my V6s, that much I'm sure of. That said, there's less separation of instrumentation, and slight less detail, but now that I've had the chance to sample different cans vs. the XD400s, I think it boils down to something entirely different. I'll repeat the theme here, the V6s are your workman phones compared to the XD400. I think it's a push, but XD400 sounds lush and detailed vs. the matter of fact like presentation of the V6. Soundstaging: Again, like the last time, XD400s are much more open in its presentation than the two dimensional V6. I think that has more to do with XD400s being more enjoyable to listen to vs. the other cans. V6s sound fairly linear (like Techincs RP-DJ1200, it sounds like everything is presented on a 2D plane or a line right thorough your ear whereas the XD400s sounds wide open as if on a stage. Not sure if I'd consider that natural, but it's closer to what you'd expect on a actual performance. XD400s are very sublime on live performances pieces, especially classical or instrumental pieces. V6s loses out terribly here, and makes everything sound flat and dull. Overall, the V6s are the workman, matter-of-fact phones vs. the more open and laid back XD400s. Both has their place, and are worthy of your time. However, I think most would prefer the open and detailed presentation of XD400s--especially on classical, instrumental, and live pieces. Sony's definitely headed in the right direction. The next obvious comparison are the SA1000s vs. XD400. I'd be interested in how the two sounds against one another.