Thinking of switching to headphones as my main mixing device. Opinions, recommendations?

[Taika-Kim]

Btw the space is absolutely fantastic on the Q701, the first time I played Valhalla Room 100% wet on some organic sound, I thought for a while that the sound was coming from the next room or outside. Not kidding!

[sfxsound3]

[*] Looking at some crossfeed/room simulation plugins

Skip this, they're just gonna mess you up. IMHO.

[*] Putting in the time to really learn my headphones, by <snip> listening to tons of commercial mixes.

Use your EQs, compressors and reverbs on those.

[*] Perhaps exaggerating the reverb and vocals a little, getting used to mixing them at a slightly higher level than I might normally mix them, and then cross-referencing with a speaker and crossfeed plugins to make sure it's all good.

It should sound perfect on the headphone. Speakers and room can mess reverb in many ways.

[*] Going a bit cheaper initially for the headphones (<$500) in case this doesn't work out.

Best place to start:
https://www.thomann.de/gb/audio_technica_ath_m50_x.htm

[foosnark]

I've been doing everything on headphones for years. I have a pair of Edirol MA-10As, but poor room acoustics, extraneous noises from other equipment, and a spouse who I don't want to offend with unfinished work and loud terrible noises

I make music for headphone listening anyway, for the most part. I used to doublecheck everything on the monitors and in the car anyway, but most of the time I no longer bother to.

[chaosWyrM]

Awesome, awesome responses all of you! These perspectives are so valuable. Thank you all!

Overall what I'm getting is that I'm not totally crazy for wanting to use primarily headphones, and if I do intend to go through with this experiment, it's worth:

• Looking at some crossfeed/room simulation plugins
• Putting in the time to really learn my headphones, by mixing and cross-checking with speakers, and listening to tons of commercial mixes.
• Perhaps exaggerating the reverb and vocals a little, getting used to mixing them at a slightly higher level than I might normally mix them, and then cross-referencing with a speaker and crossfeed plugins to make sure it's all good.
• Going a bit cheaper initially for the headphones (<$500) in case this doesn't work out.

Great advice everyone. And if anyone has anything else to add, please do! Thanks again

you got a lot of good advice and things to think about...im just gonna throw in my $.02

1. i would stay away from room simulation plug ins...all they do is confuse you in the end. if you learn your headphones...you will be able to compensate accordingly.

2. see what i said above. putting in the time to learn your headphones is the best (dare i say only?) way this is going to work.

3.see #s 1 & 2. dont "exaggerate" anything...keep it clean.

4. you def do not need to spend a ton of cash for decent cans. everyone always recommends whatever the thing was they went and bought...and im gonna do the same thing. akg q701s are (i find) absolutely fantastic for mixing and are very reasonably priced at about $250 us (you can find them even lower if youre patient or know where to search). i personally think they are (by a long shot) the best for the job at that price range, which would explain why i bought them.

anyway...those are all just my opinions, maybe something to think about.

i certainly think mixing on headphones is perfectly doable...ive been mixing mostly on headphones for the past 3 or 4 years. of course...i wouldnt recommend mixing ONLY on headphones...but then again, i wouldnt recommend mixing only on anything.

good luck

[JCJR]

I've read often the allegation that modern younger listeners probably listen more on phones than speakers. Pehaps true. Dunno.

If we grant for sake of argument that the #1 listening case is now some kind of phones, then a wild guess might place automobile sound systems #2? Or would #2 be boom boxes + small computer speakers + laptop speakers, with car audio demoted to #3?

Many folk spend an hour or more daily in auto job commutes, so those folks may have a big percentage of listening time on car speakers / car acoustics.

Somewhere in the ranking would be listening on big loud pro sound rigs at festivals, concerts, discos, nightclubs, bars. People who like to go out a lot might hear music on pro sound systems more often than any other mode? Stuff definitely sounds different on a typical loud pro sound system. Listening to one's mixes on a big disco system can be even more humbling than hearing them on a radio broadcast.

There is such large sound variability among different headphones. Equally large sound variability among different car speakers. Equally large sound variability among boomboxes, computer or laptop speakers. Or home stereo/home theater systems, or pro sound rigs.

Even back in the 1970's it was common to check mixes in the car, and check them against whatever other cheap or expensive consumer systems the musician had access to.

Seems a tall order getting it "as good possible" on all possible situations regardless the monitor system or mixing phones.

Back in the day, going to a commercial studio then after the mix, the guys pop the cassette (or later CD) in the car to double-check on the drive home-- Because some cars had bright systems with no bass, or middy systems with no bass or highs, or bassy systems lacking in mids or highs, or scooped systems with bass and highs but no mids-- It seems incredible that the car would have been at all a reasonable way to double check a mix, because it would have depended on the nature of each musician's car!

It probably worked because each musician had listened on his own car for sufficient hours to know how music sounds in his own car? So the exact flaws of his car's audio didn't matter so much, because he had learned what typical music sounds like on that flawed system? Therefore can find out if his own mix sounds "in the same ballpark" even on the flawed but well-learned system?

It is an interesting topic.

I have read some educated acousticians, contractors who build high-priced studios, allege that their pro clients in the expensive rooms with expensive carefully tweaked gear, do not have to double-check mixes on multiple systems. That the sound is so "true" on a proper deluxe room, that once it sounds right in the studio it will sound right everywhere else.

Perhaps that is true but I somehow doubt it. An alternate theory is that "on average" the folks talented enough to have enough money to build such fancy studios, are just talented enough to make consistently good mixes. And those guys would probably make consistently good mixes in less ideal situations.

Of course there are enough no-talent hacks who can afford to spend a half million or more on a studio. The smarter ones with that kind of money will also hire talent to run the facility. But it is really easy to make bad mixes in a deluxe studio if one lacks the talent for mixing.

Kinda like, maybe there are no-talent hacks who might buy an expensive 9 foot grand piano, but on the other hand the better pianists will make enough money to make it feasible to buy a nice piano.

Not trying to make any specific point, just thinking about the topic.

[risome]

How will you ref check your work if your only using cans.You need speakers and good ones as well as good headphones.

[Christian Schüler]

Please consider that the high-frequency and phase response of any headphones is a lottery.

Why do I say that? Think of the wavelength of a 10 kHz audio signal. It has a wavelength of 3.4 cm (1.33 in). This is on the order of the distance from the headphone membrane to the eardrum. For higher frequencies its even shorter.

This means that any slightly off positioning of your headphones results in different echo cancellation patterns in the waveguide between membranes and eardrum. Case in point: try to make a listening test for perception threshold of, say, a 12 kHz sine tone. Do it for two slightly different positions of wearing the headphones, and be surprised!

[sfxsound3]

Please consider that the high-frequency and phase response of ANY headphones is a LOTTERY.

Why do I say that? Think of the wavelength of a 10 kHz audio signal. It has a wavelength of 3.4 cm (1.33 in). This is on the order of the distance from the headphone membrane to the eardrum. For higher frequencies its even shorter.

This means that any slightly off positioning of your headphones results in different echo cancellation patterns in the waveguide between membranes and eardrum. Case in point: try to make a listening test for perception threshold of, say, a 12 kHz sine tone. Do it for two slightly different positions of wearing the headphones, and be surprised!

The same goes for monitors/rooms/listeners and other variables. They're all different and there is no one standard to measure against, or it's difficult/expensive to achieve. We're not talking doing something with scientific precision. It's a hobbyist/bedroom producer situation. Would a 'pro' ask the OP's question? Big studios mixing only on headphones? On the other hand, are headphones reliable enough? Of course they are.

[Christian Schüler]

Didn't mean to start an argument, just a word of warning. Therefore I edited the loud words in my post to normal conversation

I speak from experience sort of. I had the phenomenon while doing my dodgy orchestral compositions. For example, an instrument like a glockenspiel will only have 2 or 3 harmonics in the audible range when the fundamental is masked. If one of these is then falls into a dead zone of the headphones, you can easily be misled to think there is nothing there. It was quite surprising to get back from an AFK and getting my headphones on (with a slightly different position now of course) to miraculously have the glocken way to prominent all of sudden. I only have an 'audiophile' headphones (Sennheiser Momentum, which is seriously not flat), but the general phenomenon should exist with any headphones.

[gaf_thit]

Just to throw in a tip about a set with good passive ambient sound insulation. The BeyerDynamic DT770 also come in a M version, DT770M.
M for monitoring. It's said to have -35dB of ambient sound reduction.

I'm considering that, as I make music in an apartment and I'm starting to suspect that one of my neighbours has COPD.
Also considering the Q701, but have to save up, maybe get monitors instead just for low volume checks.

[kevvvvv]

el-bo

Take care of your ears. It might seem obvious, but the closeness and tight vacuum nature of listening to sound this way can have a much greater impact on your sensitive ears. Absolutely resist the urge to go loud, and take frequent breaks.

So true.

Only today I was listening loud without realising, and suddenly felt my ears sucked away.

Normally I only use speakers, but my studio has been in transit and for curiosity I left off connecting the speakers, just cos.

Have to say I miss the body vibe of speakers.

Great thread this. Informative.

[JoeCat]

Off-the-radar but anything by V-Moda is batsh*t value for the $. Don't let the fact that they're "stylish" put your off.

I use these 'cause I travel - they are built like tanks, comfortable, and have a flat enough response to be useful for tracking, etc.:

http://v-moda.com/xs/

The over-ear units are even better for sound quality. The on-ear's lack just a bit of punch in the bass, but the mids and highs are warm and detailed (I do a lot of electronica but also work with acoustic and vocals) and they sound at least good to great for all styles, which is not always true of even some of the best cans.

Don't get me wrong - they can't compete with the upper-end Sens or Beyers, etc., that are really designed for audiophiles and monitoring, but they kill any consumer-oriented product. These are great for when you just want to plug in and be creative, and also for comparing a final mix with similar tracks on Spotify, etc. There aren't a lot of products I "love"; - even collapsing them (they have a steel frame that you can sort-of slap to fold) is joyous.

Huge bonus is the cable can be swapped left / right (don't laugh - now I can't go back), and is virtually indestructible.

[JCJR]

This means that any slightly off positioning of your headphones results in different echo cancellation patterns in the waveguide between membranes and eardrum. Case in point: try to make a listening test for perception threshold of, say, a 12 kHz sine tone. Do it for two slightly different positions of wearing the headphones, and be surprised!

That aspect may argue in favor of good quality in-ear monitors with custom-mold earpieces? Even with "three sizes fit most" generic earpieces, the depth of fit could vary every time the user inserts the plugs. The depth may be sufficiently short to raise resonances too high to matter and resonation is possibly less likely compared to phones.

With ER4p and generic rubber earpieces I get sufficient seal for good bass with a variety of seating depths. The sound audibly varies according to seating depth. They don't have to be inserted very deep to get a good bass seal, can be screwed in quite a bit deeper, and sound different according to seating depth. I don't know why the sound changes according to depth. Perhaps unlikely a resonant effect in such a well-damped small air volume between driver and eardrum, but maybe it is some kind of resonant effect. Variable insertion depth just seems to affect mids as well as highs, though bass is strong and steady at about any depth giving a good seal. Maybe deep insertion push on tissue near the eardrum, changing the eardrum response characteristics? Dunno.

A good custom mold earpiece ought to allow repeatable spacing and minimal distortion of tissues near the eardrum. At least with my ears, custom molds only fit in one position. I had custom molds in the past for etymotics musicians earplugs. They have to be re-made occasionally because the rubber shrinks or the ear changes size. After a few years mine would get too loose for a good seal, for whatever reason. The generic earpieces work "good enough" for most tasks so I haven't recently had custom molds. OTOH if repeatability is mission critical, custom molds might be as good as it gets.

Hadn't listened to the ER4p much for a few years. The last few weeks have listened to them quite a bit on android, laptop and ancient 32 GB iPod. 27 ohm impedance if remembering correctly.

I ought to order some new generic rubber earpieces or get a custom mold. The old ones still work but look ratty. The foam earpieces don't work for my ear. Also I ought to dig out the original case, which IIRC still has a filter removal tool and a couple of filters. Or maybe should also order some new filters (tiny things that keep gunk from getting inside the tiny drivers). Maybe the filter material could degrade after 15 or 20 years even if they look clean. Maybe a "brand new" 15 or 20 year old filter still wouldn't be worthy.

I don't habitually listen to phones. Mostly "pretty nice" three way monitors tweaked as good possible in a "fairly well treated" room. The ER4p just sound a bit different than I recall, but may be elderly ears. Or old/dirty filters. No distortion and they are capable of painfully loud output. I ought to study it more. The thangs seem to sound different on the lenovo laptop vs kindle vs motorola android phone vs the old iPod. Strangely the "fairly deluxe" laptop with its realtek hd audio doesn't sound as good as some of the others. In years past I usually used the ER4p on "pretty good" audio interface outputs or mixer outputs, so maybe oddities in various devices' headphone drivers explain the differences.

The ER4p are so easy to drive to reasonable listening level, it seems strange that different cheap devices would seem to sound so different. Unless it is a psychological effect determined by day-to-day mood and attitude. OTOH the monitors in my treated office generally sound about the same every day regardless of mood.

They mainly seem to have stronger bass than I recall, but haven't investigated why. Maybe the headphone drivers or maybe degraded filters or maybe elderly ears. I found an ER4p review which well-describes how I recalled them from the past-- https://www.head-fi.org/f/threads/revie ... ds.506087/

How would any one describe the Etymotic’s house sound? It is analytical and bright, fairly neutral while slightly on the thinner and colder side, tight and impactful bass that isn’t quantitatively large, resolving and fast which are very typical of BA based IEM. This is the sound Etymotic concluded from different studies done 20 years ago involving the accuracy of sound reproduction. However there were discussions over the year among users on whether such kind of sound really is accurate. I think the answer can be both yes and no. While technically speaking, the flat, neutral Ety sound can be a representation of how sound is ought to be reproduced; the common trend among headphone manufacturers is however to EQ the missing part of the sound and makes it more engaging in order to recreate the speaker-like listening experience.

[BertKoor]

Just to throw in a tip about a set with good passive ambient sound insulation. The BeyerDynamic DT770 also come in a M version, DT770M.
M for monitoring. It's said to have -35dB of ambient sound reduction.

I'm considering that, as I make music in an apartment and I'm starting to suspect that one of my neighbours has COPD.
Also considering the Q701, but have to save up, maybe get monitors instead just for low volume checks.

I own one of those DT770-M's. Great for FOH usage and monitoring for drummers, cases where you need to get some isolation from loud ambient noise. Does the job well in that regard. Isolation the other way around isn't too bad as well, they don't bleed out much.

They sound good enough, but not flat: there's a freq spectrum bump at around 160Hz or so. But you'll learn to get accustomed to that.

[kevvvvv]

Those V-Moda XS look the coolest headphones I ever saw