|
"HiFi News & Record Review" |
|
|
Aren't we all aware of the benefits of headphones, like the total absence of room-related sonic problems and the promotion of domestic and/or public harmony? Just keep away from the sort of levels which issue the snakelike hiss so detected by rail commuters and airline passengers cursed with seats next to headbangers with open-backed cans. And don't we already know about the lone negative aspect: the sounds are inside your skull instead of in front, where the music would be in real life? This pro-headphone bleating is simply here to nag/inspire you to audition Grado's latest triumph, a sequel to the stupendous sub 90 pound SR60 headphone. Enter the SR125, which is as remarkable in its price class as the less-expensive SR60 is for the price category below. Since the specifications are limited and I don't want to dismantle the sample to hand, I'm almost at a loss to describe what you get for your extra 60 pounds. The 150 pounds SR125 differs from the SR60 in ways which I barely noticed. For example, that the cushions on the SR125 are 75mm in diameter, compared to the SR60's smaller 60mm. Then there's the notion of intent: the SR60 is fitted with a 3.5mm stereo plug ideal for personal hi-fis, with a 3.5mm-to-1/4in adaptor supplied. The SR125 has a 1/4in plug, suggesting more serious, audiophile applications. So I waded through the similarities. Both headphones are fitted with ‘standard copper' cords six feet in length. The open air, vented-diaphragm, non-resonant air chamber capsules and the drivers seem identical. Both sets of cans enjoy drivers matched to 0.1dB, and the SPLs (for 1mV input) are 94dB for both models. The headbands are nearly identical. But what's this? The SR125's voice-coil wire is ultra-high-purity copper instead of the standard fare used in the SR60 and it has a lower impedance (32ohms versus the SR60's 40ohms). So there are some internal differences, and the extra millimeters of earpad foam aren't the only changes. Listening, though, removes any doubt that the extra 60 pounds is well-spent. However much I adore the SR60, however much I feel that it will more than satisfy the vast majority of domestic hi-fi listeners and nearly all personal hi-fi users with a modicum of discernment, the SR125 is worth the extra money, and for four specific reasons. With apologies to Herr Brocksieper, the EarMax's creator, I used the SR125 successfully with the EarMax tube headphone amplifier despite a possible impedance mismatch. It also worked a treat with the L'il Headcase/Rega headphone adaptor powered by Classe Dr-10 power amps and with a selection of popular personal hi-fis via a plug adaptor. Among these were the Sony WM-D6C Walkman Pro and MZ-R2 MiniDisc Walkman, and Onkyo's DX-F71 and Technics' SL-XP150 CD players. Call ma a heretic, but at no time did the SR125 sound starved for level. Even with the EarMax, fed with the output of the Marantz CD-12/Audio Alchemy Dac-In-The-Box and the line-outputs of the various personal players, I never had to turn the volume control past the halfway mark. But, whatever my confidence in the SR125, I trust that not one of you is stupid enough to buy any pair of cans without trying them first through the headphone output you'll be using at home... Your sixty-quid quartet of gains over the SR60 include - regardless of the power/signal source and in ascending order of worth - slightly firmer bass, a smoother top end, marginally faster transient recovery and greater transparency. None, you will note, suggest a move to a larger or more closely-coupled headphone; I didn't cite an increase in bass extension or quantity, merely in the control. This seems to be a by-product of the fine-turning/upgrading which also results in the faster transient recovery. On the other hand, sweeter treble and greater transparency sound suspiciously like gains from wire improvements, for instance better copper in the voice coil. And there are those who'd argue that a 1/4in plug always betters a 3.5mm plug. But I don't A/B plugs; I've got a life. Whatever the means with which John Grado --torchbearer of the Grado legacy -- wrought this magic, there's no doubt that the four improvements combine to deliver one overall benefit: that of refinement. These are not power increases, nor imaging tighteners, nor even gains in dynamics or detail. Rather, they exemplify the differences indicated by one tiny clue: the aforementioned plug size: They're all the sort of differences noted between listening to personal hi-fi systems and proper, full-blown separates. They're what we pay for to enhance our listening pleasure beyond minimum or medium standards. In this case, they force upon the SR60 and the SR125 two different roles: the SR60 is for portable hi-fi users or those conserving their finances, while the SR125 quite clearly provides the calibre of sound best called 'entry-level high-end'. It's worth noting that I'm not alone in my current passion for things Grado; nearly every headphone-using colleague I spoke to in the USA keeps either SR60s, SR80s or SR125s handy for reviewing portables as well as headphone amps. Apparently, they work wonderfully with the absurdly popular and decidedly cute Headroom units in battery, mains and hybrid forms. And, as if to prove that the press hasn't completely lost its ability to judge products with some consistency, Grado Laboratories just recieved AAHEA's 1995 Golden Note award for Peropheral Design for the SR80. Not having used the prize-winning 80s, I can't really comment on its position in the hierarchy. But I have tried the models above and below it - the 60 and 125 - and I believe that they rank with Genexxa LX PRO5 speakers and Theta's TLC jitter buster and most Audio Alchemy products for sheer value-for-money. So for
me, it's two in a row for Grado. Naturally, I can't wait to hear the
hat-trick. |