Audioquest Nighthawk Headphones

Are the Audioquest Nighthawk headphones any good? Anyone own them and/or have any impressions on them?

 

There is some good information in these threads:

http://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/audioquest-nighthawk.133/

http://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/zmf-omni-vs-th-x00-and-nighthawk.676/

 

You should really read the HF thread about them for some laughs.

 

It's a very polarising headphone but I think it's fantastic. I get peoples issues with it i.e mid bass hump, polite upper mids. This headphone takes time to appreciate or to adjust to. It's not exaggerated in the treble so it can give an impression of a laid back sound but the truth is it's the bass that makes it seem this way. The Nighthawk has a very soulful sound, it is very smooth. The bass extension compares to my old LCD-2 but it has a thicker more impact bass. Vocals sound dream, so smooth!

I own the HD650 too and I think they are both great, I prefer the NH because it has better bass and treble, less distortion. Owning this headphone has made me more sensitive to distortion :/

It get's a lot of hate but try it, don't listen to any other headphones for a while and you will maybe find something special!

It has it's issues but what headphone doesn't? the older LCD-2 which people love have pushed back upper mids too, I don't personally think the NH's are much different. If you like a romantic sound then these are great.

 

thank you all for the response, I apologize I didn't see the threads already made here about these.

 

The funny thing about whether people seem to like or dislike this (or maybe any "can") is that if they start talking about what the headphone is doing at various FR areas it normally indicates what they've already decided !

Whereas, if they use various references to music they listened to there's at least a. chance they may have found some "value" to the headphone. Of the two different ways of describing what they've heard , only the second type of decription is actually of much use to others.

Not having developed my "Physic Powers" I have no way of knowing how someone came to the conclusions they did ! For all I know they. could have been listening to "the Teletubbies Oompah Band's Greatest Hits ; deluxe MP3 set" through an Electrophonic "B" stock headphone amp.

Do you think that could "Throw a wrench in the works" of what to believe ?

YMMV (for sure), Steve

 

"Decided"

I didn't "decide" to dislike the Beyer T1v2. Beyer decided to make it sound awful. Whether I talk about how it fucked up pretty much every piano or cello piece I put through it, or that the lower mids were bloated and the upper mids scooped doesn't change what was wrong with the headphone or why I hated it.

Both approaches have value. The danger of describing music is that you just end up describing music instead of the headphones - e.g. "The piano chords are crystal clear and struck with authority." Such phrasing tells me nothing about what an amp or headphone sounded.

I guess the flip side is that describing the different frequency ranges fails to capture the whole picture and dwells too much on the abstract? Honestly I couldn't say; I've always found it to be a much better way to understand sound signature.

I expect the same applies to the Nighthawk. People that liked or disliked it simply have different ways (and abilities) of expressing why.

 

The fact of the matter is that if there are differences in the frequency response with respect to a reference, whether that's a headphone or a "flat" frequency response, those differences are there regardless of your music. A recessed midrange is a recessed midrange whether it's more apparent on jazz or metal.

I believe I see what you're saying but I think it would be more beneficial for the reader to understand these comments and/or measurements and learn to know what they represent with respect to the reader's preferences. If I tell you Adele's vocals are way too distant on song X, that's just my opinion. Someone else can find her voice to be just prominent enough for them, but that wouldn't change the fact that the headphone may, objectively, have a recessed midrange.

 

Wow.... I think you need stop holding back how you really feel about things !

ROFLMAO !!!!

(I'm guessing Audioquest won't be adding your endorsement of the NH on their web page any time in this Century) ( I will admit I may have felt the same way about the stock Senn. HD800 which I. almost "gave" away early on.)

 

As Jimmy Durante would say "That what I said!" (I'm betting you're way too young to even know who this was)

Actually the correct word I was going for was "implying" ( but then I couldn't quote Jimmy ! )

 

After reading some comments on Hype-fi many people have been trying different pads on the Nighthawk. I bought the Brainwavz Velour pads and chucked em on.

Have to say it's quite a change! Thought they where talking bollocks as usual. The mids breathe now as when I was doing AB testing with open phones I found that boxiness would bother me a bit.

So the Brainwavz Velours thin the sound out. Mid bass is less boomy, more air seems to escape so it's not as warm. I'd say it sounds as warm as my 650 now maybe less where as before it would sound a little too warm at times.

Mids seem to have better clarity, they are still not as intimate as the 650 but they are about a similar position to the Philips X2 but with a slightly smoother tone to vocals. They sound more aggressive than before, the treble doesn't sound dark at all due to the big bass taking the attention from everything before. Bass extension seems to hold up, maybe slightly more rolled off but it's difficult to tell as I'm still adjusting. Better soundstage depth, more defined stage.

Still a slight, resonance? something along those lines

So far I think it's a good change and I'm shocked they didn't use Velour to begin with as the driver of the Nighthawks is actually very good! much more comfortable x10 hate pleather pads.

I do think a bit of treble roughness has come through but it's a more refined treble than many in the price range and under. reminds me of a smoother, slightly less aggressive D7000.

@purrin I would be curious to see how they measure on your system, if oyu still have them and have some Brainwavz Velours lying around I'd love to see how they measure compared to the pleather pads.

 

I got the same result. I went from hating them to not hating them. It remains to be seen whether I will ever love them. Right now, I can't pull the Ether C's off long enough to give them any time. I have the NH's on constant play at my shop to take away the "not burned in" argument.

 

Not just me going crazy then? Haha. I actually think the Nighthawk is quite competitive with velour pads. At least sounds closer to the 650 in terms of technical ability by still think the Senns edge them on micro detail, hard to say.

 

@Ryanr1987 - I have some recent measurements on my shitty rig of the stock pads vs hybrid HM5 pads (note that the cups also have some acoustic fiber stuffed inside).

I'll post those when I get home (though you may have to remind me...).

 

I just put a set of Brainwavz angled velour pads on my Night Hawks & I like the difference quite a lot. Female vocals moved to the front of the stage where they were previously eminating from somewhere behind the Bass player. Other than reducing the bas hump's intrusion into the midrange, I hear a much more open, less tubby sound. I think a big difference is frim moving the driver farther from the ear, with the thicker pad. You can compress the pads by pressing in on the earpieces & hear the return of some of the sound that I don't like. I may try the Audeze pads if I want to spend the money. I have a pair of the Brainwavz HM5 velour pads, but I think I am experiencing the benefits of moving the driver farther from the ear. Anyway, I am finally loving the NHs too much to start fiddling with them. Maybe later.
Thanks,
Kev

 

I have a pair of these for long-term listening when working. I use the velour pads.

Disagree that they are Satan's own HPs, or Edition 9-level sonic offenders. Not perfect, but they do some things very well (articulate bass, good recreation of small-scale jazz and classical recordings, decent dynamics). I prefer them to 650s for some forms of listening, not all. Require careful auditioning, but interesting and distinctive HPs, IMO.

best,

o