General Headphone Advice

early version pre-fazor

 

I just keep hearing things that turn me off from Audeze. Serious quality control issues, telling lies or misleading information. Reps at shows who don't seem to care. Not that HiFiMan is all that wonderful either (ie, wrinkles in HE-1000 drivers "normal").

 

Here's the frequency response of my LCD-2.1 (from a single channel?) from 2010, provided by Audeze:



What do you guys think?

 

I personally find the HD800 much more enjoyable when I EQ down not only the 6kHz peak but pretty much everything between 6-20kHz with 3-6 dB. I know the FR graphs don't support there being too much of a problem up there but my ears tell a different story.

Now with SD's mod I'm able to use less EQ to get the same result. I can make 6 kHz pretty much +/- 0 dB and in general less EQ is always better so SD's mod definitely helps but it's by no means a total cure for the HD800 imho. The same might go for the HD800S I suspect.

I'm not saying all you three guys are wrong, you three guys are right up there on the list of people who's opinion I respect.

I'm still playing around with EQ after I got SD's mod installed, once I'm happy maybe I'll start an HD800 EQ thread. Maybe in 2-3 days or so. Could be fun.

 

I wish Sennheiser would do at least this much.

 

1) I have no idea what compensation they use. I think no one has figured out what compensation audeze uses, but it is historically optimistic on their part.

2) it's only one driver, can't discern matching.

3) from prior comparisons, we know that audeze smooths the shit out of their fr graphs. 1/3 octave makes any transition look clean. For comparison, I think tyll uses 1/12 or 1/20 smoothing.

4) the scale is similarly optimistic; 10 dB jumps on their own aren't a problem, it's that the graph ranges from 20-120, and we only care about 70-100 here. That heavily subdues whatever exciting bits aren't already smoothed out.

Anyway, take my gripes with a grain of salt. I am skeptical of any company's self produced fr graph, even sennheiser's. Most importantly, it's just a graph. You've already said you liked those headphones a lot. The graph shouldn't really change that in either direction, whether it's marketing propaganda or not.

EDIT:
5) they also misspelled the name of the EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLAR measuring head, which indicates either a lack of attention to detail or possibly that they are using a knock off measuring head on the sly...

 

So is there really no TOTL headphone out there with superior resolution and soundstage but also tonal qualities similar to either HD6xx? Are we stuck choosing either tonality or resolution?

 

Unless we're counting the HE90, no.

 

@Merrick - we've both mentioned it before, but I think you are looking for the Audio Zenith PMx2. A Pair was brought to the last meet I went to and it was described as "HD600 with tighter bass and less aggressive upper mids" and " the flattest responce I've ever heard in a headphone".

Now, I thought it was a touch boring, but I'm not after flat as a board measurements.

 

@JoshMorr, we have talked about the PMx2 before and I really hope a loaner for that ends up happening because I want to hear what sort of synergy I get with my gear. I heard them for maybe five minutes at Canjam in the Liquid Tungsten listening room, which was anything but quiet, and it sounded kind of dead to me, but I don't think my Pono was capable of adequately driving it, because I turned the volume up to max and it still sounded too soft for me. I need to hear it through an amp.

But I will say that it's based on a PM-2, which from what I've read, isn't the last word in soundstage or resolution. So while it may be higher end than the HD600, it's not necessarily the marriage of resolution/soundstage/tone I was referring to.

As I said though, I really want to give it an extended audition with my own gear.

 

I never thought it would be such a problem for so many to find upgrades for their 6xx. Its weird sennheiser just couldnt do it in a direct- linear way.

 

@Walderstorn

I think there are many good options out there. Second hand HE-500, LCD-X, LCD-3 or HE-X in particular. Maybe HE-6 if you're inclined to play with speaker amps but I haven't heard it.

I personally prefer the HD800 with some EQ over Audeze because I like the openness to the sound, comfort and soundstage, but without EQ and if the Audezes weren't so damn heavy and warm I might have been an LCD-X owner instead. The HE-X is pretty great out of the box.

The HD6X0 is a VERY good headphone, especially for its price. But it has drawbacks too, it lacks a bit in soundstage. The bass isn't as extended as the totl headphones, the bass can be a bit flabby and not so precise, it's not especially fast, it's not the last word in transparency etc. But the fact that it isn't so super transparent can also be a blessing in disguise, it's a pretty forgiving headphone for bad recordings.

I think once you move beyond the HD6X0 you'll probably still love/like/respect it but you'll also see that it isn't the end all and be all.

I'd say probably try the LCD-X or HE-X And if you really want a bit of midrange bloom, just like the HD650 has in particular, use an EQ and boost the midrange a bit.

Both are much more expensive headphones though, diminishing returns and all that.

 

Yeah im saving and hopefully this year i can attend to a london meet, that would help me greatly i would think.

 

I'm actually glad I never got too married to my 650s. Granted my wallet might of appreciated it but I got to try out a bunch of cool stuff. I realize not everyone can do that but that's part of the fun for me I guess.

 

References to the HD600's quality are usually qualified by the "for the price" clause, which I see repeated constantly.

Setting aside their poor euphonics, I found them to be solid performers in all key technicalities, with the famous exception of the recessed vocals and under-performing bass. They are a clear, but not a huge improvement over the K553. From what I recall, the HE-400S beat it in some key areas that are probably related to euphonics (planar vs dynamic sound). The HE-6, stock and under-amped is massively superior. The TH-900 is likewise much better -- I'm not talking about "15%" better, but very significantly superior to the point I would gladly shell out 3-4x times the amount of a HD600 to achieve that improvement. Those are my experiences. Going by the net experiences from many reviews, any high-end planar and some ToTL dynamics, are going to destroy the HD600. For example, note that the HD600 was invited to Tyll's Big Sound as a low-end baseline, apparently used as a mid-fi palat-cleanse.

 

What are you objecting to? My friend uses the 600 for music production and mixing, seems to work well for that purpose.

I love the 650(m) but I wouldn't kick the 600 out of bed. Still sounds more "correct" to my ears than a lot of what I've tried in the $100-400 range.

 

Or a lot of the stuff in the $400 - $2000 range. See audezee, audioquest nighthawk, mr speakers, grado, ultrasone, beyerdynamic, pioneer se-master, bedazzled beats etc etc

I would take a HD600 over 90% of what it offered out there.