Headphone question


I generally do not use headphones for listening, as I prefer my loudspeakers.  However, I do a lot of digitizing of my LPs (a long-term ongoing project).  For the last few years, I have been using Grado SR-60s to monitor the recordings I make on a Marantz pro-sumer CD recorder.  While these are very pleasant sounding headphones, they are a tad euphonic, warming up the mid-bass, and rolling off the treble.  This makes them great when listening for pleasure, but using them as monitors for recording tends to result in recordings that are too hot on top and too rolled off in the bass.  So I am thinking of looking for a new set of cans, one that would be more of a professional-style sonic balance, very revealing, and very flat in frequency response.  Sonic beauty is not the goal here; I want to hear everything being burned onto my CD-Rs, warts and all.  The headphone equivalent of studio-monitor loudspeakers is what I need.

I prefer over (around) the ear designs.  I do not need isolation, nor is bleed into the room an issue for me.

My ears tend to get sweaty with closed-back designs, so unless there is a closed-back design that avoids sweaty-ears, I would prefer open-back designs. 

Also, since I have a connection to a certain retailer, I can get big discounts on the brands this retailer carries, so I want to restrict my choices to one of these brands.  Also, since my budget for new cans is limited, I need to restrict my choices to headphones that have a street price of about $200 or less (less being better).

Here is a list of the brands from which I can choose, with most models from these manufacturers being available to me:

AKG
Sony
Sennheiser
Audio Technica
Shure
KRK
Fostex
Roland
Ultrasone
Grado
V-Moda
Direct Sound

Any adice would be very much appreciated!  Thanks.

bondmanp
+1 mapman  its been a long time since i owned them but my recollection is that if anything, the SR-60s are a little bit hot compared to the Grados. 
I do not have SR-60s but do have px100 II and px 200 II.   One open back one sealed but both with similar Sennheiser tonality.

I also have over ear Sennheiser Momentum phones which bump up the low end a tad for the masses but otherwise are typical higher end Sennheiser home (not pro) sound to my ears
the couple i like in your range are the sennheiser momentum and the philips l1 (both come in on-ear and over-ear versions).

mapman:  Thanks, I tried no EQ, and the results were generally too bright, and with enemic bass.  That is partly due to many of the typical rock records I am digitizing, as well as the cartridge, and perhaps even the quality of the CD recorder.  I don't use excessive EQ, just a little gundry dip and a nudge of accentuation in the bottom two actaves.


Noted about the Sennheisers.  My first cans were the 424's, purchased in 1976, which I used for almost 30 years (!) before they failed.  The Sennheisers in my price range would be strong contenders.  I have heard they are on the bright side of neutral, which I would prefer if dead flat isn't available in my price range.  What I really need to avoid are the many headphones engineered to boost the bass and/or warm up the treble, like the Momentum.


loomisjohnson:  Thanks, but the Momentums are disqualified specifically because of that bass boost, which, IMO, the Grado SR-60 shares.  I will look into the Philips, but that is not on my brand list in the original post, so no deep discount for me on that brand.

mapman
 "Why not just record with no EQ and have a recording that is same as original? If source is Ortofon cart recording should be no brighter or different than otherwise, right?
Or if the cart is too bright to start, maybe something can be done there"

I agree with mapman here. Digitizing of LPs is a very laborious process. It's not something I undertake often but when I do, I want the cleanest, most accurate dub of the LP that's possible. It's one thing to apply some EQ to the occasionally bad LP but if you find that is frequently needed, it suggests something else might be awry. It's better to fix the problem at the source, imo.