Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Aug 31, 2014 18:14:27 GMT
I went down to one of my favourite shops for electric pianos in Eastbourne today. They always do you proud and ended up buying another piano.
I tried the piano with just it's own speakers and then on headphones. The headphones astonished me to be honest. In fact, I took them off, thinking that I was listening to the piano on its speakers out loud. The sound was coming from a closed headphone, and yet, it sounded as though I was listening in open air. I didn't think that the headphones were working.
That was my introduction to the RH-300. They were so good, I bought both the piano and the headphones.
Bringing them home I found the extremely good with recordings as well. They don't seem too closed in for a closed headphone. They also remind me of the sound that my Yamaha headphones make.
Maximum input is 1600 mW and it's frequency response is quoted as 10 - 25 kHz. Impedance is low at 40 ohms and sensitivity at 101 dB/mW.
They are very lightweight on the head and resemble the Yamaha in shape. (Or the m50 which I used for a while but ultimately didn't like)
These have a fast bass which does actually seem to go low without being fat and boomy. Mids seem extremely good and although the treble is quoted up to 25,000 hZ, to me, it seems slightly rolled down but still seems to shimmer well on cymbals. In fact, they seem to be very well balanced from top to bottom. I'd say pretty even sounding actually.
I think they retail at somewhere around £120, but the sound is pretty good as a monitor headphone that plays music well. There doesn't seem to be anywhere where I'd say is boosted. (If anything, there could perhaps be a dip in lower treble? So they aren't at all glassy but there is a shimmer)
I spoke to a studio guy about them and he said one thing about them is that spares are a bugger. Also, the lead doesn't come away. Apparently, it's difficult to get replacement pads for them which makes them a no go for pro work which is a pity, because they Re very good headphones.
One of the better closed headphone sounds I've heard at this kind of price level. Close to my lovely Yamahas.
Someone on HF reckons;
' ....That the RH-300, is a re-badged, significantly tweaked MDR-7509HD, with an improved accuracy in all frequencies below 2khz.' It hasn't got the Sony 'edged' sound in the treble.
|
|
solderdude
Administrator
measureutternutter
Posts: 4,881
|
Post by solderdude on Aug 31, 2014 19:23:40 GMT
Sony would wish they could make drivers like the RH300 ! It does look like a Sony but so do some other headphones so understand the thought... I auditioned it for a while and compared to the HD650 but felt the RH300 slightly lacked finesse and to-end extension. The RH300 isn't really cheap (around GBP 130 ?) but is value for the money for sure. RH300: For comparison the 7509 measured by the same guys: As you can see there is no relation to the RH300 The open version of the RH300 is the RH-A30, both are great sounding headphones. RH-A30: Both are on my 'recommended list' together with the Roland RH-A7 (slightly cheaper version) I never understood why these headphones are hardly ever mentioned in forums. I liked the RH-A30 slightly more than the RH-300 as it is slightly more detailed sounding. They are certainly up there with the DT250-250 for instance.
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Aug 31, 2014 20:09:58 GMT
I've seen all kinds of rumours about them, Frans. One guy says a rebadged Sony. Another claims it to be an m50 driver in there. Yet another reckoned an Audio Technica and finally ....... A Fostex driver!! The sound is close to my Yamaha mt 220. The graph looks pretty flat. I wonder how accurate it is.The drop at 2.5 kHz may be what I feel is a warm feel up there, although the graph does show it disappearing quite fast, way lower than the quoted 22 kHz. At least that accounts for it's slightly warm balance, although there is still a shimmer on cymbals. My ears only reach to 17kHz in any case so at least I'm not being fed too much information!! Good up loud for monitoring and not as shut down as a dt150 although the Beyer is fine once eq'd. I'm not sure this would eq up top looking at that graph unless the drivers are good. I like the bass quantity and extension. Speech sounds great. Speech on film seems to sound more natural than overdubs done in the studio though. The headphone really distinguishes between different microphone distances very clearly and easily picks out room acoustics. TBH though, I often feel that the BBC 'voice' sound is off kilter and overly warm and chesty. That's what I think this headphone is picking up because I don't pick up a ramped 100hz on them. I hadn't realised you reviewed it on the blog. I'll take a look.
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Sept 7, 2014 10:18:58 GMT
Straight comparison with the Yamaha mt220 reveals that the Roland is slightly more 'congested' in sound. They are close actually but the Yamaha has a bigger bass and seems to go higher up in the treble with more energy.
That suggests that either the Roland is flat with that roll off that Frans showed on the graph or the Yamaha has more like a 'u' to its shape. The Yamaha seems to have more space around the sound so that really hefty tracks start to sound slightly compressed on the Roland by comparison.
The Roland is more 'polite' sounding and the Yamaha seems more lively.
Both are really excellent closed headphones though. The Roland a30 looks even better though.
|
|
solderdude
Administrator
measureutternutter
Posts: 4,881
|
Post by solderdude on Sept 7, 2014 11:38:42 GMT
The MT220 is far from flat. It has a hump in the bass a lower hump in the mids and somewhat elevated treble. This makes the MT220 more fun and the RH300 more 'boring' on direct comparison. What headphone sounds most realistic when listened to exclusively over a longer period with high quality recordings ?
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Sept 7, 2014 12:23:54 GMT
It has a hump in the bass a lower hump in the mids and somewhat elevated treble. This makes the MT220 more fun and the RH300 more 'boring' on direct comparison.
Exactly what I'm getting Frans. The Yamaha is indeed a 3 humped camel!! I would say that the Roland is a great headphone. I'd just prefer a little bit more treble extension on it though. I must admit, you have made me curious about the open version now as well although the hump in the treble might make it sound a bit edgy?
I think 'long term' the Roland is better. Going back and forth just makes you think you're missing something because the Yamaha is more etched in the treble. The Yamaha also has an almost 'detatched' bass at the bottom end. It goes off almost like a sub woofer on occasions and at other times, nothing much. The Roland is more even in the bass. As you said earlier, the lack of treble extension is it's one weakness, although it's ok when the volume goes up. At least it doesn't turn nasty in the treble, which the Yamaha can.
Funny thing concerning a Roland - I'm not so keen on their electric piano sounds which to me, often sound off kilter, but the headphone is spot on.
The 300 does make me think of the Beyer 250 in that nothing sticks out.
|
|
solderdude
Administrator
measureutternutter
Posts: 4,881
|
Post by solderdude on Apr 8, 2017 21:03:56 GMT
Rabbit kindly sent me his RH-300. I have always been interested in this headphone and had my hand on the 'buy now' button a few times. This mostly based on the few measurements out there which looked quite tempting. My elaborate tests and findings are found HERE in the usual place. The headphone is quite sturdy and looks nice. The headband is soft and padded. The pads are pleather and reasonably soft and compliant. The clamping force is excellent, not too tight, not too loose so a good seal is possible. The cups can be rotated over almost 360 degrees. Swivel is small, about 10 degrees but sufficient. Height can be adjusted over 35mm so will fit larger heads as well. Comfort is quite high but the ears do get warm after some time and the pads somewhat sticky. Isolation is good. Not stellar but somewhat better than most other sealed headphone. The cable is quite long (3.5 meters) and has a 6.3mm TRS jack. It can be screwed off and then a 3.5mm TRS jack appears. Plug looks nice. The cable is supple, feels nice and sturdy and is not microphonic ! There is a 45mm driver with a measured impedance around 45Ω. It has a quite high efficiency (101dB @ 1mW) so plays quite loud from portable gear. The driver can handle a staggering 1.6W so will be hard to destroy with most amps. This headphone can be used quite well for Hi-Fi listening but isn’t totally neutral. The character is warm with a deep and not exaggerated bass. Bass quality and mids is quite good. The area where it lacks is ‘clarity/presence’. When listening to this headphone exclusively for a longer period this isn’t really evident and sounds reasonably ‘neutral’ with nice bass, mids and sparkling but not exaggerated treble. When coming from better headphones that do not lack presence the headphone sounds a bit dull and muffled but the brain easily adjusts (a bit like the NightHawk in that aspect, but the NH is way more ‘extreme’. The treble sounds a bit subdued. It doesn’t sound rolled-off but also isn’t very bright nor super detailed. The only areas where this headphone thus is lacking is clarity/presence and treble quality. The treble tonality is a bit off and not refined yet smooth and soft. Because of this tonal character it can be listened to at higher SPL and for longer periods. Below the measured frequency response which wasn't as 'flat' as other measurements suggested The frequency plot and what I heard have a high correlation. A good thing is that one easily gets used to the presentation and after half an hour of aclimation started to feel it did sound somewhat balanced but perhaps slightly dull. When coming from 'better' headphones it severely lacks presence and has poorer quality treble. But as said... after a while it doesn't appear that way and sounds more than acceptable. An easy pad swap (Brainwavz hybrid pads) improved this headphone measurably and audible as well as a leap in comfort. Below the FR with those pads. With those pads it becomes a much better (more Hi-Fi) and even more comfortable headphone.
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Apr 9, 2017 9:37:02 GMT
So they weren't quite as flat as the FR suggested? I thought they seemed a bit dull up top but blamed my hearing. Smooth, I guess but just a bit unexciting. In fact you said that at one point Frans. I compared with the Yamaha and said that the Yamaha seemed a bit more crystal and you did actually say that the Roland might sound dull by comparison since the Yamaha isn't too flat.
Tbh, I preferred the Yamaha sound.
|
|
solderdude
Administrator
measureutternutter
Posts: 4,881
|
Post by solderdude on Apr 9, 2017 9:45:14 GMT
The pad change does make them more exciting/lively.
Construction and comfort (especially with Brainwavz pads) is excellent.. no cable microphonics. Maybe I will shorten the cable, haven't decided yet. 3.5 meters is way too long for portable usage.
If only Superlux could have that build quality and use the new drivers and have Brainwavz alike pads. I would happily fork out 200 Euros for such a headphone, but they better tune it to my taste then.
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Apr 9, 2017 12:13:24 GMT
I didn't consider them a poor headphone though Frans. Just drab!! The cable is a pain and you'd think that it would be removable given that the target audience is basically people who monitor.
Maybe the treble dullness is for those that monitor all day? Beyer dt150 is the same in that respect and is used extensively for monitoring playback. Not for mastering but more like radio or performing studios.
They struck me as good for that although the hot pads would put pros off and that fixed lead. I think that the Roland would make a good quality portable headphone. Even better with a 3.5mm socket (if it fitted) so that you are free to choose whatever length you want. One of the really nice things about the msr7 is the ease of changing the lead so that you can have an IPod/phone lead for control, or just a short lead with nothing or a long lead to an amp. I also use other lengths with it. One for tv and a filthy great long one which lets me walk in the kitchen while plugged in to an amp!!!
It would be nice if Superlux produced something with a better build, but at the same time, I'd hate to see them pushing the price up once they realise that they might sell a lot. That's the problem ..... sell loads at a cheap price or much fewer at higher prices. Less labour intensive for same money? (Because they might produce less)
I liked the Roland but craved a bit more kick in the treble as well.
|
|
nate
valued member
Posts: 5
|
Post by nate on Dec 30, 2019 19:06:14 GMT
A while ago I picked up a pair of Tascam TH-300X (they normally sell for $150 but sometimes go on sale for $40). I was interested because of the Roland RH-300 review here and this mini-review which implies a lot of the headphones like this are really the same: www.head-fi.org/gallery/album/omnitronic-shp-900-a-k-a-isk-hp-3000-mdh8000-roland-rh-300-clone.1095975/The list of same/similar models is seriously long: ISK HP-3000/MDH8000, Roland RH-300, CAD Audio MH320, CEntrance Cerene dB, Devine PRO 900, EAGLETONE ORIGINAL FIRST headphones, Fiveo PH1000, Harlan Hogan VO-HP Headphones, ISK MDH8000, Kurzweil HDM1, Limitless Creations HP3BK, LyxPro HAS-10, Marantz MPH-3, Neewer NW-3000, Omnitronic SHP-900, PreSonus HD9, Proel EIKON H800, PROFORMANCE P8000, Studiomaster H5, Tascam TH-06, Tascam TH-300X I can say that underneath the pads on my Tascam TH-300X, they look exactly the same as the Roland RH-300 as pictured in solderdude's review, and likewise the performance of the headphones improved a lot when I swapped the Brainwavz hybrid pads on them. Anyone know who the OEM is on these? Are these headphones being built whole and branded/customized at the factory for different companies, or is the frame (headband, arms, cups, etc.) something off the shelf and then a driver being added to it by another company? The reason I ask is that I have another similar but different headphone, the Maxell MXH-MD5000, which was a Japan-only domestic product which was made in Taiwan: web.archive.org/web/20171222010237/http://www.maxell.jp:80/consumer/headphone/mxh-md5000/index.htmlWhile a lot of it is similar, there are differences - higher quality plastics, different clamp force, drivers that are not angled, and have different venting (there's a double chamber behind the driver in the cups). The stock earpads are real leather and have acoustic foam integrated into them that tame the highs. Specs: Driver 45mm in diameter, beryllium-coated diaphragm Impedance 32 Ohm Sensitivity 96dB/mW Maximum Input 1600mW Frequency Response 20 - 40,000Hz Two detachable cables (1.2m 3.5mm mini plug / L type, 3.0m 3.5mm mini plug), 6.3mm threaded adapter On the Maxell I found the bass and treble a bit too intense, and sought out some alternate earpads, which led me to the YAXI stPad2 which I imported from Japan: www.yaxi.jp/product-gallery/stpad2/Very unusual earpads in terms of shape (trapezoidal cross section) and because they use both protein leather and Alcantara on the inside, specifically with the intention that you put the Alcantara half behind your ears L and R, which alters the sound reflections inside the cups and improves positional perception of sound. Overall I found it really improved the sound of the MXH-MD5000, but I have too many headphones and they gathered dust for a while until I was resorting things recently and remembered the Tascam TH-300X and the RH-300 relationship and the overall similarity of these headphone designs, and decided to put the YAXI stPad2 on the Tascam TH-300X and wow, what an improvement! Perhaps my favorite closed-back headphones to date, and I'd say overall better than the Maxell MXH-MD5000, which kind of surprised me considering how the Maxell are built with higher grade plastics, metals, and much more exotic drivers. I think the TH-300X are the same as the RH-300, though it is funny how Tascam/Teac don't seem to list the TH-300X anywhere on their websites... here are the specs off the box: Driver 45mm in diameter Impedance 40 Ohm Sensitivity 98 ±3dB Maximum Input 1800mW Frequency Response 10 - 26,000Hz 1.2m 3.5mm coiled cable with 6.3mm threaded adapter Compared to the RH-300 specs: Driver 45mm in diameter, neodymium magnet Impedance unlisted by Roland (measured at 45 Ohm by solderdude) Sensitivity 101dB/mW Maximum Input 1600mW Frequency Response 10 - 25,000Hz 3.4m OFC litz wire Anyway, just curious if anyone has any more insights into these headphones, and I wanted to mention my success with the YAXI stPad2 on them... I would be very interested to see measurements with those pads, I'm curious how they manage to transform the experience so much! Seems like YAXI is really onto something with their stPad2 design.
|
|
solderdude
Administrator
measureutternutter
Posts: 4,881
|
Post by solderdude on Dec 31, 2019 11:47:58 GMT
I have no idea who makes the drivers nor who the OEM is for the different brands.
Don't have the RH300 any more nor the YAXI pads (there are so many) so can't verify or measure unless it is sent to me.
|
|
|
Post by phoenixsong on Feb 9, 2020 10:20:10 GMT
I have the Presonus HD9 and HM5 Hybrid pads; the Roland RH-300 is on the way I sincerely believe that the HD9 is a different sounding headphone than the Roland RH-300 based on how the RH-300 supposedly receives a sonic leap from the HM5 Hybrid pads from the graphs while the HD9 clearly suffers from it. With the HM5 Hybrid pads, the HD9 sounds thin, trebly and shrill/piercing. I suspect the HD9 could be related to the Centrance Cerene dB though, as they share exactly similar specs and even physical details to their build. Seems like the only difference could be with the cable
|
|