Kennerton Rognir Review (Closed Back Headphone)

[PeteL]

Headphones are not speakers. They are able to absorb incredible amount of EQ boost. Speakers will fall apart if you push them remotely this hard. These things are sitting right next to your hear and are able to pump out massive SPLs. So at normal playback levels you are able to easily boost their response without worry.

I don't doubt that, and I don't doubt the necessity to do it in some case. I was not saying your EQ is wrong neither, but I do believe that at this levels, phase shift and induced distortion can reach audible territory. It may be difficult to demonstrate since the base for comparison is a severely broken frequency response, so of course in comparison it will be much better than without, but in comparison to a response that didn't have these deficiencies in the first place, it is my belief that we are degrading the source signal in an audible way, but again, It's a net improvement so has to be done, my point was why choose headphones that needs that much to sound good.

 

[amirm]

Here is the deal folks. Headphone industry has not embraced a single standard. It is rare to see any compliance with target curve. Until this changes, almost every headphone needs equalization to sound right. If you dismiss EQ as a tool, then you dismiss almost all headphones out there.

 

[solderdude]

my point was why choose headphones that needs that much to sound good.

Most folks buy on recommendations or have a preference to a brand/ideology or have easy access to specific brands or like the way it looks/feels/wears.
There aren't many headphones that do not need EQ or just very little corrections.

 

[PeteL]

Most folks buy on recommendations or have a preference to a brand/ideology or have easy access to specific brands or like the way it looks/feels/wears.
There aren't many headphones that do not need EQ or just very little corrections.

Sure, EQ is an important tool and I use it when I can. There are times when I can't, like when I am listening on my Iphone with Tidal. Maybe one day I'll add a hardware solution, but in the meantime I find my GR10e Iems, which are my on the go drivers, good sounding. Yes surely they can be improved, but in my use case with the gear I have I can't. I do believe that the corrections would be more minor than that. I don't think that strict compliance to Harman Curve is an absolute must for good sound, but I think there are many that are not as severely compromised than this Rognir. I have nothing against EQ correction.

 

[solderdude]

For times that I can't use EQ some 'close to ideal' headphones that only have some specific treble issues (most have) there is a solution.
The recently tested Sine with different pads is one of them, or the HD560S for instance.
Not possible with this particular headphone though.

 

[jae]

I wonder how their open designs with dynamic drivers fair. That being said, where are all the open headphone reviews?!

 

[Jimbob54]

I wonder how their open designs with dynamic drivers fair. That being said, where are all the open headphone reviews?!

 

[amirm]

I wonder how their open designs with dynamic drivers fair. That being said, where are all the open headphone reviews?!

I am working on them. These were sent some 3 months ago!

 

[tifune]

For example - there really is no reason to spend 4k on the DC Stealth, because there are much cheaper options which can get you close enough to it (especially with EQ) - but there is a place for it in the market and there are people for whom 4k is not a deal-breaker or even bad value.

I've heard this criticism a few times, but I have yet to see anyone put forth any specific models? Did you have any in mind? My wallet really wants it to be true! I realize I'm at a bit of handicap because I have no use for open backs; the closest closed back I've found is Ether CX.

 

[Jimbob54]

I've heard this criticism a few times, but I have yet to see anyone put forth any specific models? Did you have any in mind? My wallet really wants it to be true! I realize I'm at a bit of handicap because I have no use for open backs; the closest closed back I've found is Ether CX.

If the CX get a price drop around black friday they are a bit of a no brainer. Yes, you may never know what the Stealth sound like, but for a low distortion closed planar the CX are up there and not $3k "worse" than the Stealth.

 

[tifune]

If the CX get a price drop around black friday they are a bit of a no brainer. Yes, you may never know what the Stealth sound like, but for a low distortion closed planar the CX are up there and not $3k "worse" than the Stealth.

I'm fortunate enough to have both, and would go so far as to say the CX is probably the current all-round closed back price : performance winner. I still use it during exercise sessions because it's higher sensitivity, much tighter fit (won't slip off), and I won't completely blow out a neck vein if I accidentally drop a dumbbell on them. Would love to replace it with an equivalent IEM, but that quest is still ongoing...

Anyhow, I feel like I'm taking this thread off course. As always @amirm thanks for the review, quite a M Night Shyamalan ending given the price + measurements. Hopefully ZMF Verite Closed is on deck at some point? That's the last closed back I'm aware of that may compete w Stealth.

 

[nyxnyxnyx]

It's never been about the "hi-end" price with headphones or pretty much any audio device classes. Think of HOW MANY good headphones you can buy under $1000 that would already sound fantastic with or without EQ?

If any of us did look around we'd know with those kinda products we hit diminishing return very quickly, and on top of that there are hardly real *constant* technical breakthroughs in transducers, so price/performance will always be skewed if you use objective standards to evaluate headphones/iems.

That's why I think the current market is already excellent! We have enough stellar products for people who stick with real objective performances, that can already achieve a big part of what we want, while the prices are usually pretty affordable. Then we have enough "abstract" headphones/iems, wild ideas, and executions that might be interesting enough for some to be in love with them, even if they might not perform as well as other established products (think of a common name like the hd600/650).

To contribute my real-life experience as a point of reference: Last week I finally got to try a quite famous DAC with a local audiophile. It was one of the DACs I dreamt so much back when this journey began. For a DAC that MSRP nearly reaches $2000 it sounded pretty much like....other dacs. Musically, nothing is broken or defected, but also there was nothing in my listening session that could have made me think that I was having a 2k DAC in my sound system.

 

[killdozzer]

It's never been about the "hi-end" price with headphones or pretty much any audio device classes. Think of HOW MANY good headphones you can buy under $1000 that would already sound fantastic with or without EQ?

If any of us did look around we'd know with those kinda products we hit diminishing return very quickly, and on top of that there are hardly real *constant* technical breakthroughs in transducers, so price/performance will always be skewed if you use objective standards to evaluate headphones/iems.

That's why I think the current market is already excellent! We have enough stellar products for people who stick with real objective performances, that can already achieve a big part of what we want, while the prices are usually pretty affordable. Then we have enough "abstract" headphones/iems, wild ideas, and executions that might be interesting enough for some to be in love with them, even if they might not perform as well as other established products (think of a common name like the hd600/650).

To contribute my real-life experience as a point of reference: Last week I finally got to try a quite famous DAC with a local audiophile. It was one of the DACs I dreamt so much back when this journey began. For a DAC that MSRP nearly reaches $2000 it sounded pretty much like....other dacs. Musically, nothing is broken or defected, but also there was nothing in my listening session that could have made me think that I was having a 2k DAC in my sound system.

I agree more than I wish to admit. And not only diminishing, but diminished. Meaning it completely stopped justifying the high price in every possible way. You can get the looks, the build quality and the performance for much less. There's no return still diminishing. You're just left without the silly name. The name is actually what has been bestowed upon Kenny Rogers after he was mistakenly accepted to Valhalla.

Anyway, these outperform the Kennerton for a small fraction of the price and this time it is not a subjective preference:

Sony MDR-7506

Studio and DJ Headphones Closed, Circumaural, Impedance: 63 Ohm, Sound pressure level: 106 dB, Frequency range: 10 - 20 000 Hz, Cable length: 1.2 m, 3.5 mm jack plug, Screw-mounted 6.3 mm adapter, Weight with cable: 298 g, Weight without cable: 230...

www.thomann.de

 

[nyxnyxnyx]

I agree more than I wish to admit. And not only diminishing, but diminished. Meaning it completely stopped justifying the high price in every possible way. You can get the looks, the build quality and the performance for much less. There's no return still diminishing. You're just left without the silly name. The name is actually what has been bestowed upon Kenny Rogers after he was mistakenly accepted to Valhalla.

Anyway, these outperform the Kennerton for a small fraction of the price and this time it is not a subjective preference:

Sony MDR-7506

Studio and DJ Headphones Closed, Circumaural, Impedance: 63 Ohm, Sound pressure level: 106 dB, Frequency range: 10 - 20 000 Hz, Cable length: 1.2 m, 3.5 mm jack plug, Screw-mounted 6.3 mm adapter, Weight with cable: 298 g, Weight without cable: 230...

www.thomann.de

Ah yes! The old reliable sony 7506. I used to own them for a period of time, along with the MDR-CD900ST. Soundwise I don't enjoy them as I do with my current headphones but they were really neat, and that was before I started to try EQ so they might actually sound even better had I applied it. One thing I extremely love about those headphones is that they're so durable and reliable. I'm really sick and tired of the so-called apex headphones having driver issues and build quality problems (thinking of some models from hifiman, focal, audeze and more...) while my hd650 and beyer 990 are maybe 10 years old or even older and they still work splendidly.

Back to price diminishing topic. I think it's up to what standard we use to evaluate something. If we use objective standards then it's clear to see that most products are more expansive than what they should be, in comparison with other competitors of the same class.
But if - if our sole reason in this hobby is just to buy whatever we enjoy, then even if I buy a $10,000 headphones that measure like somebody practiced zig-zag lines on the chart, as long as I can enjoy that headphones to the fullest and feel like I truly like it, then the purchase is easily justified.

So it's really up to the purpose of a person. With real objective, measurement criteria we should be fair and just, or even a bit harsh. But with subjective aspects, we can't really say if something is right or wrong because we don't truly have something we can use as the norm standard, so with that I think we should be lax and respectful toward other people's experiences (sometimes, some folks here bash other people's experiences a bit more than they should).

 

[Skinner001]

I've heard this criticism a few times, but I have yet to see anyone put forth any specific models? Did you have any in mind? My wallet really wants it to be true! I realize I'm at a bit of handicap because I have no use for open backs; the closest closed back I've found is Ether CX.

The mentioned Ether CX, other DCA options.
Drop Aeon X Closed is currently on sale.
If you go up in price you get the DCA Noire.
AKG K371 if you can love with the build (I personally can't but comfort and build preferences aee personal).
Options from Shure, prehaps Senn HD280 pro.

I have the older Ether C 1.1 and, even though I want to buy the Noire, I can't justify splashing on them.

 

[PeteL]

For times that I can't use EQ some 'close to ideal' headphones that only have some specific treble issues (most have) there is a solution.
The recently tested Sine with different pads is one of them, or the HD560S for instance.
Not possible with this particular headphone though.

That was my point. Not possible with this particular headphone. I think what I meant to say is that it's difficult for me to consider a headphone that sound really bad, a good headphone. EQ are a great tool, but I think that in general, smaller adjustments that can craft the response to a sound signature that is optimal to you should absolutely be used since as Amir said there is no universally accepted response. But, to me, when more extreme corrections like this is needed just to make a headphone listenable, It is to correct a real problem, this to me is enough to qualify this headphone as problematic. If I try a headphone and find that it sound great, well EQ can only make it sound better and I know that it will be parsimonious. If it sounds like c**p, sure many times it can be saved, but hard EQ like that involve some real measurable compromise. It may sound OK, but it remains that you are applying 9 dB of gain to a region that was already distorted more than the rest of the spectrum. It remains that you are generating some measurable unlinearities in the phase response. Even if it has real subjective benefit to do so.

 

[Zensō]

So it's really up to the purpose of a person. With real objective, measurement criteria we should be fair and just, or even a bit harsh. But with subjective aspects, we can't really say if something is right or wrong because we don't truly have something we can use as the norm standard, so with that I think we should be lax and respectful toward other people's experiences (sometimes, some folks here bash other people's experiences a bit more than they should).

Except that this is a science forum dedicated to high fidelity. If a person wants to wax poetically about a low performance product, there are plenty of places to do that (practically every other audio forum on the internet). Doing so here is likely to generate some push back, which I think is natural considering the mission and readership of this forum.

 

[GaryH]

It remains that you are generating some measurable unlinearities in the phase response.

You keep repeating this, but it's false. A minimum-phase EQ (which is what should be used) will actually correct the phase response hand-in-hand with a correction of the frequency response.

 

[nyxnyxnyx]

Except that this is a science forum dedicated to high fidelity. If a person wants to wax poetically about a low performance product, there are plenty of places to do that (practically every other audio forum on the internet). Doing so here is likely to generate some push back, which I think is natural considering the mission and readership of this forum.

Sorry if I made you misunderstood, I might have worded my last post poorly.
What I meant more precisely in this situation is that Amir's subjective experience with this product was okay enough to voice a recommendation (with EQ). So along with the already-undisputable measurement data, that too can be taken as a point of reference instead of being completely discarded because the points I found in this thread like 1) "It's only good because of EQ" (because all headphones can benefit from EQ to certain degrees) or 2) "The price is just too much I can have X headphones for Y price and gain Z% performance of this" (this fact is already a rule of thumb because of diminishing return) and so on.

I don't vouch for badly measured products or even worse, largely overpriced ones, especially in a place like here. I believe in the cause and characteristics of this community, I just want to make a point that if people are going to criticize a product, they should criticize the correct aspects (performance of these headphones) instead of less relevant ones (gimbals, pads, looks) because one has a clear standard but the other doesn't.

 

[PeteL]

You keep repeating this, but it's false. A minimum-phase EQ (which is what should be used) will actually correct the phase response hand-in-hand with a correction of the frequency response.

Maybe not a audible problem, but as far as I know Roon implement an infinite impulse response filter, as does the vast majority of PEQ option. I tried to see info on a phase correcting implementation (minimum phase). I am willing to take your word for it but do you have more info on this? I have browsed around on some of these types of interrogations in Roon forums and did not find answers. Linear phase and minimum phase filters are quite common in the world of digital reconstruction filters, also in the world of room correction platforms, but in the world of general use parametric EQ it is far from being the norm.