General Headphone Advice

I preferred a modded HD650 (you can substitute HD600) from the ZDS more than a DIY T2 / SR009 combination (I owed such a combo) or HD800 / LCD-X from any amp.

Craig @ Eddie Current uses the HD600 to listen to music from the amps he's building. The LCD2rev2 sits in a case (too uncomfortable). He won't touch a HD800 (he dislikes the HD800's treble brightness).

The HD600 from an EC4-45 blew the socks out of a few people at a meet in a recording studio in downtown LA. (This was when I started to change my mind on the HD600/650).

Cost has nothing to do with the overall performance of a system according to one's personal preferences.

One of the HD600's strengths is microdetail (from the mids on up). The TH-900 has better clarity (lower distortion), but less microdetail (at least from my setups, which all tend to be "Summit-Fi" BTW). Also, the TH-900 is much different in terms of tonal response (V- shaped) compared to the HD600. The HE-6 you can get really good microdetail from, but it takes gargantuan efforts to do so. Finally, microdetail starts from the source and requires an amp that is capable of not transmitting it.

I also find it amusing that someone calling the HD600's mids (vocal range) recessed doesn't find the TH900 even moreso that way.

 

@Walderstorn:

For better and not different, get a ZDS amp for your HD600. GAME OVER. I used an HD650, but really similar thing. It's obvious you've tried a lot of stuff and came back to the HD600. I don't say ZDS because I am associated with EC; but I say it because it is totally honest advice. ZDS also gives you a springboard to move to HD800S if you so desire.

 

Don't get me wrong. The DIY T2 paired with any 'stat headphone was SUPER awesome. To put it succinctly, I was in an electrostat phase, being seduced by their exquisite clarity, lightning fast speed, and ethereal presentation. But over time (maybe a year), I found myself listening to music less and less and less. I started to regret selling my ECBA (selling my BA was my biggest regret and dumbest ass move to this day.)

Ultimately, I have pull the "Mercer" factor on this one. I just wasn't moved by the sound of 'stats. It's kind of like being attracted to super skinny tall blondes, only to find out that f'ing girls who are bit thicker and juicier is a lot more pleasurable.

 

My advice:

1. Keep the HD600. You can consider toying around with some of the same mods than benefit the HD650 (pretty easy to find on this site). Sure, they're not perfect, but I promise you that it's nearly impossible to find a more well-rounded headphone than the HD600 or 650 (pick to tastes, which you did already). Their main deficiencies are a slight lack of bass control compared to the absolute best and a stage that might not be as wide or 3D as some other headphones. What they do right is tone, with the HD6X0 having perhaps the best tone out of any headphone, resolution, micro-detail, slam, a true sense of being hi-fi (not some wonky bullshit frequency response making it sound bright and nasty "hi-fi"), AND they scale like no other. Seriously, the better gear you keep feeding them, the more they will reward you.

2. a. Save up for a really nice DAC. It seems most are very well served by the Gungnir multi-bit or Yggdrasil. Your next step from there will be investing in a good USB->SPDIF converter (Mutec 1.2 is a nice stepping point), which should offer surprisingly noticeable gains over straight USB into the Gungnir MB or even USB into something like a Regen. You can also consider dedicated digital audio transports that output over BNC or AES, depending on the DAC you pick.

2. b. Alternatively, you could consider investing in further upgrades for the Crack + SB right now. Better output caps, a PSU choke, a better volume pot (I recommend a stepped attenuator if you can afford a good one), the best tubes possible, and potentially even better internal wiring. Sure, the Crack is always going to be on the euphonic, fun side of things, but you'd be surprised how far you can take it. Meanwhile, continue saving for a nice DAC.

3. For down the road, save up for any number of the great tube amps. Eddie Current is a good place to look. DNA has good tube amps. Maybe even the Bottlehead Mainline + upgrades. Try to make it to meets and shops to sample various gear while you save. You'd be amazed how much the right tube amp can transform the HD600/650 or even the HD800.

4. If after all this you're still feeling the itch for a better headphone, consider getting and HD800 or HD800S. I think the tone is pretty shit on those compared to the HD6X0, but they do have it beat with slam, clarity, resolution, distortion, and so on. You can get the tone closer to where it needs to be with mods and have the best of both worlds. And by this point you'll be rocking a setup that will really do the HD800 justice. TBH, you could run the HD800 from the Crack and be plenty happy, but there's more to be had (even if you still want a euphonic, lively sound).

Alternative: See comment on trying out gear at meets and at shops. You could end up being a Stax sort of guy. Or maybe you'll just prefer planars. I just have yet to hear anything that sounds overall "right" vs the HD600 or HD650.

Don't buy into bullshit claims that more money necessarily equals a better headphone (or really for any product, albeit higher prices more often mean better DACs and amps than it does for headphones). Try gear for yourself when you can and be wary of what others suggest, because only you can figure out the best path to take for your own needs and tastes.

 

Well, look, can't make any promises, but the HD600/650, especially modded, should give you an "Oh...I see." moment when you hook it up to the right setup. You'll know it when you hear it. Amazing the underlying capability a $300 headphone has. I don't know how many $1000+ headphones I've heard next to it that just sounded like they were an afterthought and half-baked at best. I personally find the HD650 to be slightly more refined over the HD600, ignoring the fact I find the HD650 to have a better tone naturally, and the 650 benefits a surprising amount from mods as well.

I won't deny the drivers used in the Fostex headphones are pretty damn capable, but it was pretty clear to me most of the clarity and detail on the TH900 was due to exaggerated treble areas, much like on the Dharma. Makes certain things pop and stand out, sometimes with a sense of greater clarity, but it's all just frequency response toying with your senses. (One exception is if you're older or have hearing loss due to other causes, in which case exaggerated treble might be a plus.) Those drivers also don't scale as much, which is both a blessing and a curse.

 

It's true. The HD600 is actually kind of boring from run of the mill Guzzard Z20 amps. A lot of people still like its sound though that way, e.g., @ultrabike. It's that the HD600 does not make glaring errors (no pun intended).

The TH900s are sensitive and extremely easy to drive. In terms of amps, don't need much power.

This isn't Reddit. You don't need to convince people here that more money does result in better sounding systems. Some people here, me included, would even say that source is the most important and wouldn't hesitate to drop $10k+ on it. Priority depends on where you are in the ladder of course.

 

LOL, it's okay. At least he qualified the opinion.

 

@GUTB Older or newer revision HD600 (if you know, if not, when did you hear them, and could you tell if they had a black or silver screen around driver), and which amp? DAC? Were the pads new?

FWIW I find the HD650 more lively than the HD650, despite the HD600 being a bit brighter and definitely having more of a upper-midrange shout to it. Modded HD650 kicks it up another notch in terms of liveliness. Pair it with a powerful and dynamic tube amp, which is one reason I did not care for the Valhalla 2, and it's something else. I generally don't care for the Senns from solid state either for this exact reason - dull, strained, lean, dry, etc.

Again, a lot of this comes down to how frequency response characteristics affect our perception of what we hear, coupled with inherent hearing ability that can be affected by age or damage, as well as unique ways our own ears and head shape some aspects of frequency response. If you're used to a bass and treble heavy headphone (i.e. TH900), which is not to say there's anything wrong with having a taste for that, anything more neutral will sound dull in comparison, ignoring how much the setup factors into this. Still, looking at actual objective data for the Sennheisers indicates the drivers are pretty darn good in terms of response, speed, distortion, and so on. Not saying some other drivers don't beat them in some very specific areas, but I recommend looking at the entire picture, and, again, the Fostex biocellulose are actually pretty darn good as well inherently. You'll see there's a lot of love around here for the Fostex headphones with a less colored response than the TH900.

Edit: Also agree it's fine to say you think something sucks so long as you qualify and can A) be open minded about possibilities you haven't tried yet with various amps and mods and B) at least try to understand or be friendly even when you can't understand someone else's preferences and thoughts. Just trying to explain my point of view and am not trying to necessarily discredit you for thinking otherwise, and I think signs point to you trying the same approach.

 

Sucks is kind of a strong word. I prefer the phrase piece o' shit.

To follow up on the FR aspect: a lot of us tend to prefer more neutral sounding headphones. Neutral does tend to sound boring to people who like or have gotten used to more V shaped profiles (T1, HD700, PS1000, etc.)

Finally, and this one may be more subtle or difficult to understand. I don't have a problem with the "/r/headphones approach". It's different from here, but quite sound. It works, I understand it, I respect it. We subscribe to a different view of course and feel no need to prosletyze to others.