The ol' yin-n-wang.

130% class right there.

I have a sick addiction to bad puns and wordplay.

And he likes wieners.

I do.

http://www.weiner.house.gov/

SD2 is fucking up hard- it won't make it through a full song anymore- and the only thing that's changed on my computer in a long time is the OS. Snow Leopard is Snow Leper for Logic on my machine, and for whatever reason I cannot get a download of either a system upgrade or downgrade to start off Apple's site.

These polesmoking things will not download.

And that is why I have a PC.

http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/K240S/ or HD280s for mixing my kind of music (indie pop to hip hop stuff)?

EDIT: Or recommend me something better. My budget for 'phones is $150.

My system was dead stable until I decided it was a good idea to put a recent-ish OS on a laptop of '06-7 vintage. No problems that weren't related to actual physical issues with an external drive. (bad power in cases, busted connector, stupidly trying to track drums onto a "green" power-saving drive...) To be fair, I am also on a public wi-fi network, and it wouldn't surprise me if they have large downloads blocked for bandwidth reasons.

Even then, everything actually runs faster as it's a more stripped-down system, it's just that I'm getting weird CPU spikes in Logic with software instruments. Any computer can and will fuck up if you fuck with something that's proven reliable and works. OS X, Windows, doesn't matter. I hate working on (as opposed to with) computers, so I use something an orangutan could operate.

Both are very good phones and I have used them extensively. HD280s have deep, clear bass down to below what you can actually hear. They sound bass-shy compared to typical consumer 'phones which have hyped bass. Then you realize you're hearing what's actually going on down there with no frequency hype or distortion. They are LOUD and great for tracking because of the ridiculous isolation.

K240Ss have less isolation, being an open-back design. They have a much wider soundstage as a result, and more action going on in the low mids to boot, though they are not as tight and clear in the deep bottom as the Sennheisers. They are a much more natural, "warmer" (I hate saying that, but listen on both and you will know what I mean.) sounding headphone for general listening. The HD280s are very clinical sounding in comparison; think- and stereotype- "monitors" vs. "nice hi-fi system".

Both will serve you well. If you have a GC around, go listen to them both. Or a decent stereo store where you can do the same. I can work on both just fine, and do. That's actually a hard choice; it depends really on what you want to achieve or what you want to listen to. Both probably kick the shit out of anything you have sitting around headphone-wise. You will want to listen to music on them. The AKGs will probably grab you quicker for general listening. The Sennheisers can be off-putting as they sound like a monitoring tool. And then you realize you can hear everything that's going on, especially in the lows. They kill for checking your lows. The 240s have them way beat in the stereo spatial imaging department. Pick your poison.

I feel like the 280s would lend themselves to my electronic stuff, but the AKGs would lend more to my rock stuff.


FUCK.

Something is making feel like I would still prefer the AKGs. Even my hip hop stuff I try to give a more warm/natural/spatial feel to it. Like using SD2 for drums and live instrumentals.

Now I am still considering getting studio monitors too.

Maybe the AKGs and monitors would be a better combination for me? Then again, the HD280s would be better for tracking like you said. Fuck this is hard.

I have been using my Sony MDR-V6s for most headphone things lately, but recently went back to my Sennheiser HD-201s(the ghettocheap $20 ones) and even those are just beautifully clear in comparison. Even more of a bass cut over the HD-280s, but a similar concept. The high end sounds wickedly clear. The Sonys are nicer for just general listening while fucking about, because they have a little more bass and whatnot, but the cheapo Sennheisers are really interesting in comparison, as far as what kind of detail pops out through them.

Whenever i get a chance, i am going to grab a pair of the 280s, simply due to how much i like the cheepo 201s.

I am thinking HD280s purely for tracking purposes as well.

They would, and they would, and you're right. I think you should probably go with the AKGs, off the top of my head. It's not like they don't sound awesome or you can't mix electrostuff on them. (I do on occasion.) And they are probably easier to get your ears used to. I like the sound of the Sennheisers, but I have weird tastes. Either way, it's mostly a matter of familiarizing yourself with whatever you're mixing on. Get the AKGs, listen to your favorite sounding records on them, a lot, and there you go.

I'll warn you in advance though that if you're used to computer speakers or typical home stereo/boombox stuff there's a fair chance you will discover some of the records you like actually sound fairly shitty.

Ok well next question, monitors? I know nothing about monitors.

The big studio I've been at recently has a bunch of pairs of these in the big live room, for whatever that's worth, for precisely the reasons you'd think. You can actually hurt yourself with these before you will hear them distort. The housing will audibly rattle before they break up.

Re: Chris's comment on the top end- you will really learn to hate 128kbps mp3s and distorting, smeared clipping masters on otherwise good sounding stuff.

Budget fur monitaurs?

I think eventually I will just snag a pair of both

I'm entirely serious about that too.


As for my monitor budget, it isn't set yet. I am willing to save up a bit for a decent set though. What is the general price range of "bang for the buck" monitors.