NAD Viso HP50 Review (headphone)

[reluctant_engineer]

Interesting. I think Tyll's measurement of HP50 vary from yours. QC issues perhaps?

 

[sweetchaos]

Interesting. I think Tyll's measurement of HP50 vary from yours. QC issues perhaps?

View attachment 104064

Yikes...you had an account for 1133 days before posting?
Give this man an award!

 

[reluctant_engineer]

Yikes...you had an account for 1133 days before posting?
Give this man an award!

Haha I'm more of a lurker as you can see.

 

[Newman]

....

View attachment 104010

Notice how the two cups are hanging differently from each other. This is because the headband is not symmetrical.

As soon as I saw the above, I picked up my 6 years old pair and took this photo:

Looks like your review might be an outlier.

When I saw the EQ you added for additional bass, I thought something is definitely wrong here. No way I am doing that for mine.

Your EQ for added low treble, though, is interesting, and worth pursuing.

cheers

 

[gvl]

Thanks for the review. I have them and agree on the lack of sparkle... Out of the box they are easy sounding no fatigue good for long listening sessions, I should try them with your EQ settings. Getting a good seal can be challenging. It should be noted technically they are portable cans, fold rather flat and come with a travel case that doesn't take a lot of space in your backpack. Mine don't have the asymmetry.

 

[the_brunx]

too bad I don’t like the look of rectangular shaped headphones. Am I the only one?
I love nad amps though.

 

[amirm]

Interesting. I think Tyll's measurement of HP50 vary from yours. QC issues perhaps?

Hard to say. His graph has 70 dB scale which flattens the response. And he is using a HATS for which there is no researched target response. If there were one, it would look different than mine so you can't use the raw measurement from his, and apply it to mine. Only compensated ones can be compared and even then, it is tricky business.

 

[YSC]

Hard to say. His graph has 70 dB scale which flattens the response. And he is using a HATS for which there is no researched target response. If there were one, it would look different than mine so you can't use the raw measurement from his, and apply it to mine. Only compensated ones can be compared and even then, it is tricky business.

Hi amirm, but I noticed that tyll’s measurements are overlain on his own hd650 measurement and except the bass the align very well, whereas your sample showed noticeable drop in mid range compared to your hd650 measurement, so maybe that comparison makes some sense?

 

[Guermantes]

My pair of these don't fit my head at all: they sag down on my ears which is uncomfortable and noticeably affects the FR. The ergonomic shortcomings are really disappointing as I had high hopes for them.

I'm wondering if the problematic fit of these headphones is to blame for the all the differences in measurement and subjective impressions. It's fine if you get them just right but there is little leeway outside of that.

 

[YSC]

My pair of these don't fit my head at all: they sag down on my ears which is uncomfortable and noticeably affects the FR. The ergonomic shortcomings are really disappointing as I had high hopes for them.

I'm wondering if the problematic fit of these headphones is to blame for the all the differences in measurement and subjective impressions. It's fine if you get them just right but there is little leeway outside of that.

This alone is very prohibitive to recommend the headphone at all, no sound can justify that a lot of ppl will get a unit which don't even let them listen comfortably, it's like selling you a house where the bed is made out of hard rock

 

[Noodles]

I had these for a bit several years ago, they sounded fine, but i did not EQ them at the time. I also got a pair then for about 100 bucks.
Unfortunately since i got a wide head - i found them quite uncomfortable especially where the cups sit.. i could stomach the headband but not the earpads.
They appear to be quite good for what you pay for, especially with EQ.

 

[reluctant_engineer]

Hard to say. His graph has 70 dB scale which flattens the response. And he is using a HATS for which there is no researched target response. If there were one, it would look different than mine so you can't use the raw measurement from his, and apply it to mine. Only compensated ones can be compared and even then, it is tricky business.

Hi Amir, first of all thanks reviewing the HP50 & also branching out to reviewing headphones!

As for the measurements, I wholeheartedly agree that measurements taken from different system should not be compared. So that's precisely the reason I used HD650 as a comparison in Tyll's measurement I shared. As YSC pointed out, your HP50 measurement doesn't have the ear gain (~3.5khz rise) that HD650 in your measurement has. But HP50 & HD650 measurements in Tyll's do.

 

[jhaider]

I thought this phone was one of the first to be designed with the Harman headphone research in mind. Or am I mis-remembering that? I thought they were almost like the PSB M4u phones.

I think Paul Barton’s “RoomFeel” predates the published Harman curve, though obviously Barton and the ex-NRCers are not strangers. I've had HP50s since about when they came out. They were not $89 at the time...but they quickly became travel favorites because of the sound, flat case (fits better in a carryon laptop bag than something rounder like AKG K371) and that dual-entry cable. That's such a smart idea!

I had to stuff the bottom of the pads to get decent bass. See here: https://hometheaterhifi.com/blogs/traveling-audiophile-primer/

I replaced them in my travel kit with NAD Viso HP70, which have pretty-good-for-plane-drone noise canceling, wireless Bluetooth, and built in amplification/DSP. (IMO EQ at the source is stupid - EQ should be in the amp or best of all headphones should be active with their own EQ; headphones make an even more compelling case for active than speakers do, because they're all basically single-driver units and there's no physical space for passive signal shaping circuits). Most importantly, perhaps, HP70 have slightly deeper pads than HP50 on the bottom, so they seal better. All that combines to a considerably better-sounding headphone. So the HP50 have been idle for a while. Maybe I'll load Amir's EQ into the newish Quedlix 5K and give them a spin.

 

[Maiky76]

Here are some thoughts about the EQ...

I used to average L/R to calculate the score.
- Poor L/R match.
- A lot of effort to EQ it, better buy a better HP to start with

I have generated one EQ, the APO config files are attached.
Score no EQ: 56.4
Score with EQ: 94.0

NAD Viso HP50 APO EQ 96000Hz
January062021-145603

Preamp: -3.6 dB

Filter 1: ON PK Fc 60 Hz Gain 3 dB Q 1.9
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 200 Hz Gain -7 dB Q 0.91
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 602 Hz Gain -3.67 dB Q 2
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 2370 Hz Gain 3.5 dB Q 3
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 3733 Hz Gain 3.58 dB Q 3.5
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 5550 Hz Gain -5.82 dB Q 4.24
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 7105 Hz Gain 1 dB Q 5
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 10000 Hz Gain 3 dB Q 4

 

[amirm]

As for the measurements, I wholeheartedly agree that measurements taken from different system should not be compared. So that's precisely the reason I used HD650 as a comparison in Tyll's measurement I shared.

Ah, didn't notice that. Agree that he is showing far less differential than I am. Maybe they did change drivers since then. Or maybe these were rejected because they were out of spec or something. Without having the same sample as what others have tested, it is very hard to troubleshoot such things.

 

[magicscreen]

"All this said, I can't recommend the NAD HP50 without EQ. With EQ however, I am here go give it a strong recommendation especially considering the price. "

Is this some joke?
An old man is hearing it better sounding after EQ?
LOL, be happy if you can hear a thing at your age.

 

[amirm]

LOL, be happy if you can hear a thing at your age.

Reply ban issued....

 

[YSC]

Ah, didn't notice that. Agree that he is showing far less differential than I am. Maybe they did change drivers since then. Or maybe these were rejected because they were out of spec or something. Without having the same sample as what others have tested, it is very hard to troubleshoot such things.

This I think is what makes headphone measurements so all over the place for so long... vastly different from one rig to another compared to an open room calibrated mic.. and seems sealing is so vital yet difficult to kept consistent among different samples or rigs it makes the equation even more complicated.

I personally suspect this sample to be either an QC fail sample or even some kind of counterfeit as the HP50 had been recommended for so long making counterfeit seems logical, especially yours don't even make itself symmetrical

 

[SpaceMonkey]

Great headphone marred by ****** headband. I don't agree on measurements though. For me it is quite close to hd600 in the sense that i dont need to eq both.

 

[the_brunx]

Reminds me of these: (DT100/150)