|
Top Customer Reviews
|
Majestic
By
Tony
on
May 8, 2017
Style: Headphones
Verified Purchase
(If you're wondering how these compare to the [[ASIN:B00004SY4H Sennheiser HD 600 Open Back Professional Headphone]], please see the bonus section that follows this review.)
These are, bar none, the most wonderful headphones I've ever heard. For perspective, I have or have had: Audio-Technica ATH-M50 (of course) and M40x, Fostex T50RP MK3, Oppo PM-3, Philips Fidelio M1MKII and L2, and both the Sennheiser HD598SE and HD600. None of these but the HD600 come close. If you're considering the HD598 as a lower-priced alternative, it's a great headphone in its own right (especially if you don't want to go down the rabbit hole of choosing a suitable amp), but there isn't as much family resemblance in the sound as you might think.
Still, it was through buying the 598 that I decided to take the plunge on the 650—Sennheiser's 5xx series is clearly a gateway drug to the 6xx series, which fortunately is so good there's little reason to step up to the 700 and 800 besides bragging rights. There's a lot of warped machismo in the world of audiophilia, and to the greatest extent possible I'd like to avoid that in this review.
Simply put, the 650 is about the best all-around headphone you can buy for its current Amazon price of $315.99. If you already have an amp and/or a dedicated listening setup and you've never heard these, you owe it to yourself to try them. Worst-case scenario, you don't like them and you're out $6-7 for a return label. Best-case scenario, you find out just how good (and yes, also how bad) recorded music can sound. These are very much the BMW 5-series of the headphone world: there are bigger, faster, and more expensive options, but these remain the perennial gold standard. Maybe they're not your style, but there's no denying their refinement and artistry.
I think they sound absolutely perfect. Some complain they're too "laid back," even "veiled." I suspect those people just don't hear very well, because if you have sensitive hearing, "exciting" headphones are a euphemism for "death by treble." I have dog-like hearing, and most of the time it's more curse than blessing. Even with the 650, the treble can be brain-piercing with the wrong amp.
As for amp recommendations, this is a contentious and fiercely debated topic. As a general rule, you should spend the most on the final device in your playback chain (speakers/headphones), and progressively less on the "upstream" components: amp, DAC, media player. Given a budget of no more than $300 for an amp, you could buy the [[ASIN:B00E0DMCO0 Genuine National JDSLABS Objective2 Black Edition By NwAvGuy Headphone Amplifier JDS LABS (Made in USA)]] to use with a computer and the [[ASIN:B00TNSRNGO Aune B1 Class A Portable Phone/Headphone Amplifier]] for use with a portable source like your phone. These are both great amps that cost less than $150 each, but if you want to pair this with "endgame" or "summit-fi" gear, by all means do! The 650 has a reputation for "scalability," meaning its sound will continue to improve with better amps, DACs, recordings, etc. My own gear is quite modest, so I can't speak to how this sounds plugged into a $5,000 amp or rewired with $700 cables. All I know is that the 650 sounds good enough to be the end of the headphone rainbow for me. The audio hobby is usually a desperate, futile struggle against diminishing returns, and as far as I'm concerned, the 650 IS that threshold in the headphone world. In other words, you can spend ten times more, but it won't sound ten times better.
Given that, you might be wondering whether you even need an amp with these. "Need" is a strong word, and in the context of expensive headphones it's pretty hard to maintain a sense of perspective. I've done the unthinkable and plugged these directly into my iPhone's headphone jack, and you know what? They STILL sound phenomenal, but only for easy music. What's easy music? Pop, rock, basically anything recorded to be uniformly loud. Without an amp, the 650 can fall apart on classical and jazz recordings with a wide range between loud and quiet sections—there simply isn't enough power on tap to move the diaphragm as nimbly as this sort of music demands. If you never listen to instrumental music, you might be able to get away with not using an amp, but I can't recommend it. Buying such marvelous headphones and not amping them properly would be like buying a beautiful painting and not framing it. You can do it, but for a little more money you might as well get the full effect.
Let me end with some totally subjective words that describe the sound of the 650: rich, natural, musical, effortless, clean. Now some words that could just as well be applied to a fine wine (the combination of status anxiety, groupthink, and reckless cognitive bias unites both hobbies): broad-shouldered, velvety, well-mannered, savory, harmonious. In either case, a smooth finish. :)
Bonus section: HD650 vs HD600
Obviously if you've read this far, you're deep enough into the audio hobby to have realized an important psychological truth about yourself: you can't leave well enough alone. Neither can I. That's why, even after falling head over heels in love with the sound of the HD650, I ordered the HD600. I just had to know.
The verdict? It's almost too close to call, but for my preferences the 650 is the better headphone. The two have been compared to death online, but if you have the capacity to think for yourself, audio review sites and forums are usually an unsavory if fascinating combination of shilling, self-justification, and "follow the leader" parroting of received opinions. Many self-proclaimed "audiophiles" have strong opinions about equipment they've never actually heard, which I can't accept.
Given that, I decided the only way to compare the two headphones honestly was to listen to both myself for hours, going back and forth on a wide variety of recordings. The difference between a good recording and a bad recording dwarfs the difference between lossy and lossless, and the HD600 (more so than the HD650) may end up changing your taste in music because it makes good recordings sound SO GOOD and bad recordings sound SO BAD. In other words, it reveals the "truth" of the recording, and sometimes the truth hurts—it's really hard to enjoy The Killers now.
The fact is that the 600 and 650 are ultimately more alike than different, and the popular insistence that they sound completely different has more to do with what Freud called "the narcissism of small differences" than the headphones themselves. If you Google some variation on "HD650 vs HD600," you'll hear over and over that the 650 is "bassier" or "darker." Not really. There's actually very little difference across this parameter. Piano music presents an exception, but this is rarely what people think of as a bassy genre.
There are two significant differences. The first is soundstage. The HD650's soundstage is wider, but that doesn't mean it can make a cramped recording sound airy. The HD600's soundstage is more intimate; there's less space between left and right channels, but it's not a huge difference, and I could see people preferring (or at least not minding) the HD600's tighter spacing.
The most striking difference between the two headphones is in what I'd call "smoothness." The best analogy I can think of comes from digital photography. As an image sensor increases its sensitivity, it also increases its noise because you can't amplify a signal without also amplifying noise. There are two rival philosophies for dealing with noise: leave it as "grain" or smooth it out. Grain has its devotees, and the advantage of grain is that it preserves fine detail. The disadvantage is that past a certain point it becomes a distraction. The advantage of smoothness, meanwhile, is that it looks superficially nicer. The disadvantage is that when you look closely you won't see all the fine details. Like all things, it's a continuum of compromise. The 600 is the headphone to get if you value detail at the cost of an occasionally unpleasant grainy and even metallic quality to the sound. The 650 is the one to get if you care more about music than sound and don't care if your headphones sand down the sharp edges of your music a bit.
Going back and forth between the two, it quickly becomes clear that the 650 is the stronger all-around performer: it sounds nicer on more recordings and across more genres. The 600, meanwhile, is the champion of a particular niche: good recordings with lots of micro detail. Want to be able to count how many times the skin of a drum reverberates after it's struck? Want to hear such fine vocal gradations you'll know how a singer felt during recording? The 600 is for you.
Make no mistake: at its best, the 600 produces the most astonishingly detailed sound I've ever heard. Unfortunately, at its worst it sounds grainy, jumbled, and not particularly musical. I'm sorry to report that piano music sounds particularly off on the 600: low frequencies disappear and take the fullness of the keys with them. Vocals can sound oddly recessed, even far away. In general, the 600 seems to fare better with female vocals than male ones, and with strings over pianos. It's absolutely glorious for acoustic guitar, but then, so is the 650.
The 650's great advantage lies in its ability to bring out vocals like a spotlight. They stand out so clearly and powerfully from the instrumentation that you'll feel like you're hearing your favorite songs for the first time. The effect is really quite incredible: it's like there's a special sonic space reserved for vocals and unpolluted by other sounds. Based on Sennheiser's own specs, the 650 has lower distortion than the 600 and it's clearly a more refined driver unit. Whatever the technical reason, the 650's background is pitch black: sounds rise from and fall back into a sea of silence. Be forewarned: a well-recorded vocal track through the 650 may bring tears to your eyes, and that's why I kept the 650 and returned the 600.
Read more
|
HD600 vs. Many Other Headphones
By
D. Alexander
on
September 8, 2015
Style: Headphones
If this is your first foray into high-end audio, you're listening at home, and you can afford a decent amplifier, buy these cans before you splurge for any others.
Let me first attempt to burnish my credibility. I've had my HD600s for a few months. I'm not Steve Guttenberg and I haven't heard every system on earth. I have installed a number of 4-figure 7.1 systems, designed and installed my own room correction, and annoyed the Magnolia people at Best Buy by spending way too long running my own demo material through 5-figure Martin Logan electrostats. Also, I didn't spend my youth at KISS concerts, so at least for now, I'm not deaf.
Some cans I've owned or still own:
Grado SR80 (open, dynamic, $100)
Sony MDR-7506 (closed, dynamic, $100)
Oppo PM3 (closed, orthodynamic, $400)
Hifiman 400i (open, orthodynamic, $500)
I compared all of them back to back with these HD600s for many hours through a huge variety of well-recorded material, in all cases with an O2/ODAC. This latter component has ruler-flat response and zero audible distortion; I'm not messing with the output with anything that might favor one can at the expense of another.
My short take is this: start with these HD600s. Mixing, pleasure listening, whatever; if your environment allows for open cans, start here. Nothing cheaper is a more complete product in aggregate. You can spend more and get improvements in some areas, but almost always with commensurate disadvantages elsewhere. Plenty of folks with $1500 HD800s keep their HD600s anyway for when they tire of the pointed treble of that otherwise stellar can. Orthodynamics and electrostats can top them in the midrange and highs, but often lose on bass impact.
Start with the HD600s so you can find out what you like. Because it's been around for 20 years as an audiophile benchmark that everyone's heard, you can find endless measurements and comparisons. A sentence that starts with, "I like my HD600s except for ..." is likely to bear more fruit than any other reference.
That in mind, let's talk about how they're designed and how they compare with the others above.
OPEN VS. CLOSED:
Headphones are just small speakers. With any speaker, you only want to hear one side. The other side makes the same noise at the same volume, but reversed in polarity. If you could magically direct both sides at each other, they'd cancel out. (This is incidentally why it's important not to wire a channel backwards in your home stereo. Weird frequency nulls ensue.) We therefore need to do something with the reversed signal so it won't pollute the primary.
Closed cans (and conventional box speakers) cover the back of the driver with baffling material to absorb the sound energy. While this approach doesn't want for accuracy or frequency response, it does tend to make the listening space sound smaller. Open headphones (and "infinite baffle" speakers) solve the baffling problem by not solving it; they just vent the back of the speaker into a huge space. Great for acoustics (no need to account for backpressure and the like), but at the cost of treating the missionary one seat over to your collection of Eazy-E.
Sennheiser assumes you're listening at home with this can, so they've opted for an open design.
BUILD:
These are not fashion or luxury headphones. The're light and plasticky with a marbled gloss finish that must have been avant garde in 1998. While I've heard good things about the long-term durability of the ear pads, overall quality (box included) seems little better than with the pair of HyperX cans I just bought for $60. That middling impression was reinforced a few weeks after purchase when I started getting intermittent cutouts in one channel.
Sennheiser supposedly solved this problem eons ago. Their warranty department was responsive, but wanted me to send back the old cable before they'd ship me a new one. (Counterpoint: Logitech's repeatedly sent me replacement Anywhere MX mice with little more than a request and a serial number.) That wasn't worth the hassle. I bought an aftermarket version on the big auction site for $15 that's been reliable for months.
SOUND AND COMFORT:
Comfort is excellent. I have a big head and big ears. There's a lot of compression and I had to stretch the band a bit. After that, low weight and plush cups that actually fit around my ears made them easy to forget. The SR80 are on-ear and uncomfortable, the PM3 are on-ear (for me) and very uncomfortable, the 7506 are on-ear and equally comfortable (because they have no clamping pressure), and the 400i are over-ear and equally comfortable.
Treble is very good. Clean, not strident, and neutral or very slightly forward. On par or better than the 400i for most material. The PM3 is noticeably recessed, but otherwise excellent. The 7506 has a somewhat forward mix with at least one frequency peak that can make it sound thin. The SR80 is quite sharp and tiring with trumpets, violins, and so on. This same treble overemphasis can add life to otherwise dull recordings.
Midrange is excellent. The 7506 sounds fairly good, but a bit "fake" and radio-ish back-to-back with the others. The SR80 has a large emphasis here suited to solo vocals, but becomes fatiguing quickly on any recording with more than a few things going on, particularly modern rock or pop. The 400i is stellar. The PM3 is almost as stellar, though ever-so-slightly colored. The HD600 has a very subtle, pleasing coloration I didn't catch until I equalized it. Detail resolution is slightly behind the orthos.
Bass is very good. Both orthos play a little deeper and with better definition, but lack the HD600's "punch." The 7506 is decent here, though not terribly precise. The SR-80 might as well not have bass at all. There's a definite argument for the PM3; I might even prefer that one because, like all good orthos and unlike conventional dynamics, there's less distortion at low frequencies. Very pure, distinct tones.
My best description of the HD600 is "euphonic." There's nothing wrong with the sound. It doesn't sparkle or pound or whatever wine-review description accompanies cans that try too hard. It's the kind of sound that makes you wonder where the last three hours went, the kind that can make some pieces sound almost distressingly beautiful.
FILES AND DACS:
You can't talk about an output device without a parallel discussion of the signal chain. That includes your audio file, a DAC, and an amp.
The importance of file format is overrated. No one's ever been able to reliably tell the difference between 44 KHz / 16-bit CD "Redbook" audio and any ostensibly better (e.g., SACD, DVD-A) digital format. Surround sound or the limited dynamic range of analog records might be pleasing to some folks, but for pure 2-channel listening, there's no point chasing anything better than a CD.
In fact, even lossy compression may suffice. Much of the vitriol directed at lossy file formats stems from bad encoders. If you converted your CDs to low-bitrate MP3 with whatever terrible encoder we had fifteen years ago, you'll probably catch some noises you won't like in some material (e.g., a subtle warble in the ring of a cymbal). But modern 256 Kb/s AAC (Apple's preferred format) or 320 Kb/s MP3 encoded in the last five years? The confluence of factors necessary to be able to distinguish it from the original source (trained listener, good hearing, great gear, isolated sound, repeated listening, looking for that specific flaw) is so rare as to be irrelevant.
DACs (digital to analog converters) take your MP3, FLAC, MP4, or whatever digital signal and convert it to an analog signal that can be amplified. They're not that complicated; this conversion is very much a solved problem. Or would be if not for the lack of a line-out to skip the amplifier stage in most audio devices, the tendency to bury the poor DAC among other noisy components (read: every motherboard ever), or design priorities that favor subjective impressions over measurements (defensible with an amp, but not a DAC). Still, the audible difference between a mediocre DAC and an average one is modest, and between average and great, only slight. If you want a standalone DAC anyway, consider jumping straight to the $125 price range for a JDS ODAC or a Schitt Modi. Both measure well enough never to need upgrading.
AMPS:
Amps have one primary purpose: make the cans play loud enough. Your laptop, phone, iPod, and sound card all have amps already. Whether any particular amp/headphone combination plays loud depends on the sensitivity (dB/mW) of the headphones, their "ohm" rating (their input impedance; the electric equivalent of backpressure), and how much power the amp can output at that ohm rating. Cans with low impedance (< 50 ohms) and high sensitivity (100+ dB/mW) are easy to drive. You can push them to deafening volumes from most any device. Higher impedance cans like the HD600, not so much. They need more power. They need an external amp, whether portable and battery-powered or a metal box at home.
Just for kicks, let's do some math to prove the point. Loudness is all about decibels. Deafening is 120 dB, loud is 90 dB, and libraries are 40 dB. On this scale, things sound twice as loud every +10 dB, but every +3 dB needs double the power. You probably want to be able to hit at least 110 dB for transients. Maybe 115 dB if you don't like your spouse and never want to hear them again.
The iPhone 6 has pretty typical power output for a portable:
Driving 15 ohms: 45 mW
Driving 30 ohms: 25 mW
Driving 300 ohms: 3 mW
The scale is linear: double the ohm load and you (in physics land with spherical cows and amps that don't run out of current or voltage) cut the output wattage in half. These HD600s are 300ish ohms with sensitivity around 97 dB/mW. The iPhone manages 3 mW for a load like this, so we're looking at maybe 101 dB max. Weak sauce, particularly since that's the loudest possible volume and the average volume for most recordings (that aren't Metallica) will be quite a lot lower. (If you raise the average levels with a maxed-out amp, the peaks won't get any louder, but they will clip and distort.) Compare Oppo's PM3: that one does 101 dB/mW with impedance around 30 ohms. With 25 mW from the iPhone, we end up at 115 dB; much more potent. You'd need 63 mW at 300 ohms (about 25 times as much power) to get the same volume out of the HD600.
If you're evaluating other amps and cans, here's where the numbers came from:
Max dB at a given power = sensitivity + 10 * log ( input mW )
101+10*log(25) = 115 dB for the PM3 example.
Power needed for a desired dB = 10 ^ ( ( desired dB - sensitivity ) / 10 )
10^((115-97)/10) = 63 mW for the HD600 example.
After power, the amp's next challenge is to not ruin frequency response. That's hard for one big reason: the impedance of dynamic headphones (all of them unless labeled orthodynamic or electrostatic) changes with frequency. It might be 200 ohms at this frequency and 400 ohms at another. If the amp's output impedance is zero, this shift in headphone impedance doesn't matter. If it's more than zero, the voltage sent to the cans (and by implication how loud they are at that frequency) will change over the frequency range. Whatever response curve Sennheiser had in mind ("Ve shall haf 14% less zeebilance"), high output impedance can result in something very different. This is why it's hard to take subjective opinions seriously if you don't know how the headphones were driven.
There's another benefit to low output impedance: better bass control. Speakers tend to get sloppy and distort at frequencies near their resonance peaks. That manifests as a muddy, definition-smothering bass hump. The best way to prevent this distortion (assuming you want to; some people actually like it) is with electrical damping, the ability of the amp to electrically resist unwanted movement (much like it's hard to spin a motor if you've shorted the power terminals). To keep bass distortion and frequency response changes inaudible, the amp's impedance needs to be, if not zero, at least 8 times less than the headphone impedance. A few inexpensive devices manage this 'damping factor' of 8 with just about every can (e.g., the original Sansa Clip+ that measures 1 ohm), though not many (the various iPhones tend to be 5-10 ohms).
Everything else about amps starts to get subjective. To me, a perfect amp has zero distortion. To the folks buying tube amps, distortion is the whole point. Same thing with deviations to the frequency response curve; best-case, it's flat over the entire range, but if your headphones have a V-shaped response curve to boost bass and treble, an amp that rolls both ends will make them an easier listen over the long term. Tube amps usually attenuate the high end; since the classic "audiophile" curve has strong treble to emphasize detail, softening that treble peak quite often sounds better.
Anyway, long story short, if the open design of these HD600s didn't already to consign them to home use, their high impedance probably will unless you want to supplement your traveling kit with something like a Fiio E07K. Schitt's Magni and JDS's Objective2 and EL Amp are all very strong choices for a setup tethered to an outlet.
CABLES:
They don't matter. Buy whatever you want.
The only cable characteristic we care about is impedance. Thicker cables have less, thinner cables have more. Provided the combined impedance of the amp and the cable result in a damping factor above 8, it doesn’t matter if the cable can tow a boat or floats in a breeze. An improvement in impedance you can’t hear isn’t an improvement.
Let's evaluate the stock HD600 cable, a 9-foot pair of skinny 30ish-gauge wires. For that length and gauge, we can calculate an impedance of about 0.8 ohms, barely a rounding error relative to the 300+ ohm impedance of the headphones. A typical 10-ohm amp paired with the HD600s has a damping factor of 30. Add the cable and it's 300/10.8, or 28. The difference in sound wouldn't even be measurable.
Output volume is likewise unchanged. The power reaching the drivers is 300/300.8, or about 99.7%. It’d take a 20% loss to drop the volume by a single decibel. Run the same weedy cable to a 4-ohm living room speaker and you’d lose 17% of the amp's power (converted to heat over the wire run) and reduce the collective damping factor to 5, best case. In a room bedecked with acoustic panels, you might just detect the loss in fidelity. In an untreated room, the cable would be the least of your worries.
Better cables do tend to have more durable interconnects, though they won't sound better unless the old ones were corroded. Neither will balanced cables. Their claim to fame is a reduction in channel crosstalk, but that benefit is marginal for high-impedance cans and further obscured by the even stereo mix of most material.
HD600 vs. HD650:
The HD600 is one of the most neutral headphones available. Everyone says that about speakers they're used to that don't have glaring response anomalies (and sometimes even if they do), but it's true here: the correction to flatten the HD600's frequency curve is minimal. Music tends to be mastered with a neutral output device in mind; if your hearing isn't unusual, neutral cans are likely to sound good over the broadest cross-section of material. Inner Fidelity's response plot of the HD600 might as well be a genre reference.
The HD650 is the same experience less some treble. It's constructed almost identically to the HD600; the $100 price difference has nothing to do with sound quality. Rolling the treble lends a "warmer" and slightly less detailed sound that'll flatter music mastered "hot" (with compressed dynamic range to make everything sound loud) or with an excessive treble bias. The HD650 also won't draw quite as much attention to themselves. Whether that's better is personal preference. The HD700 and HD800 take the opposite approach: you're getting detail whether you want it or not.
Not all detail is the same. Detail comes from boosted treble or better drivers. Lesser cans favor treble. Bumping the high range sounds clear and vivid on first listen, but quickly becomes tiring. (Bose speaker demos are notorious for relying on this effect.) Better cans opt for more powerful, higher-impedance, lower-distortion drivers (or different technologies entirely as with electrostats) so intrinsically revealing that the manufacturer can use a more relaxed tone curve. The most detailed dynamic cans (i.e., the HD800) have only a mild treble bump (albeit marred by an unfortunate 6K peak). Less, even, than the HD700, which makes do with a less sophisticated driver. It's unsurprising, then, that reviewers tend to find the HD700 a little harsh on direct comparison.
You could approximate the HD650's tone curve by plugging the HD600 into tubes, but if that's really what you want, there's a better way.
SIGNAL PROCESSING:
Here we enter controversy. Audiophile purists believe in maintaining the integrity of the signal from recording to output. 24-bit audio, SACD, fancy cables, and Class A furnace amps are not out of place in this crowd. I respect the motivations for that view, but I've abandoned it with the HD600 for the better. We've had enormous advances in signal processing over the last twenty years. The HD600 is a mechanical device. It doesn't, and can't, have a perfectly flat frequency response. The cups and driver enclosure impact the sound too much, even if the driver itself could be made perfect, which it can't.
But if we measure the output curve, we can recreate any frequency response we want by digitally modifying the input. This is DSP: digital signal processing. The software equalizer in iTunes is a basic DSP, as is Autotune and every "enhance" button you've ever seen in a music player. The processing is almost never "free" (in the sense that it'll only have positive effects), but the benefits can vastly outweigh the downsides.
To jump straight to the point, a company called Sonarworks has measured and corrected the HD600. The plugin to apply the correction is about $70, and in addition to making the HD600 a legitimate tool for mastering, it’ll correct any perception that the HD600 is ‘bass-light.’ Bass impact sounds speaker-like through it. The only corollary requirement is a VST-supporting player like J-River Media Jukebox or any of a dozen VST hosts (e.g., Audio Hijack, Pedalboard2). If you don't like the result, you can emulate a variety of other headphones. Grado GS1000? Sure. HD650? Yep. I hate spending money on things that aren't hardware, but in this case, I'm sold.
It gets better. After you've installed that, try Wave Arts Panorama5. It's a very powerful binaural emulator that'll take recordings out of your head and put the singer in front of you. Real binaural recordings use a dummy head with physical ears to create positioning cues that can sound wildly more realistic. Panorama (and free, albeit much inferior alternatives like 4Front and Psypan) attempt the same with math. Done well and matched to your ears, it can leave you agog. ("Why is my neighbor pounding on the ceiling? Oh. Wait.") Likewise a program (aptly) called "Out of Your Head," which is expensive because the author measured a bunch of high-dollar audio setups. Want your HD600s to sound (exactly) like a movie theater? That's now a thing.
IN SUM:
To wrap this novel: definitely try the HD600s. They're often on sale in the low $200s and there isn't a more complete product at that price. For $300 even, if you don't want to bother with an amp, consider the Hifiman 400S. While I preferred the Senns over the 400i, a number of folks rate the 400S slightly better than both despite the price gap. Oppo's PM3 remain a terrific choice if you're on the go, have small ears, and don't want to annoy everyone. Truly though, you can't go wrong with any of them.
Read more
|
Comparing & Contrasting the HE-400I vs. HE-400S
By
Tinfoot
on
November 23, 2016
Verified Purchase
[[VIDEOID:1a905ebee642f2ae1a584920ca688126]]This review is solely concerned with directly comparing and contrasting the HE-400I versus the HE-400S to help others who may be already sold on the Hifiman planar experience, but don't know which way to turn... which describes me when I began shopping the two, albeit I now own both.
Before I begin, I feel compelled to point to an old review from two years ago that says, "these sound nothing like the HE400s.," and clarify this person means the original HE-400, merely putting an "s" at the end for (I guess) generalized pluralization. That review had originally confused me until I realized the review was singling out only the HE-400 against the HE-400I.
When I was first considering which set to buy a couple months ago, I had dithered quite a bit between the 400S and 400I headphones, reading ALL the reviews here on Amazon and various audiophile forums. And I still wasn't decided until I read a simple statement left on an audiophile forum that really crystallized my determination -
"If you like warmer audio, the HE-400S. If cooler, HE-400I."
Being one who does tend to gravitate towards warmth, even if it is by only relative degrees, I bought the 400S first. However, I had promised myself that if the 400I went on sale, I would pick up a set as well. Sure enough, Black Friday week brought a big drop in pricing for the 400I. Nothing else, at least I would be able to finally get a hands-on (err... or heads-on?) evaluation between the two, confirming or denying all the stuff I spent days reading when first deciding.
Frankly, for those who are also waffling between the two choices, I would indeed highlight that statement concerning veiled warmth versus analytical coolness as the pivotal decision point. There were a couple other trade-off aspects I had to answer for myself at the time, ones I will bring up for your own food for thought.
1) I knew beforehand that the FocusPads (non-A variant) were standard on the 400I, and that getting the same for the 400S pretty much put them on par in terms of general audio characteristics. I really didn't want to be forced into an additional expenditure right out of the gate, which was a point in favor of the 400I. Still, after a month of owning the 400S, I did fork out the $40 for the Hifiman FocusPad replacement earpads. And, yes, replacing the stock all-velour pads on the 400S does indeed aurally bring it effectively to the same spectrum table as the 400I, save for that "warmth vs coolness" difference. On the other hand, the FocusPads also effectively made my 400S purchase at $340. I still frown on the apparent "necessary additional expenditure".
As a side note when looking at after-market earpad replacements, be aware that the Hifiman earpad rings are 110mm all the way around.
2) The 400S is easier to drive. I had no problem getting full sound potential on the 400S with my Samsung Galaxy S6. Conversely, the 400I needed me to use a separate software DAC with a pre-amp slider to get them to play up well. I only use the smartphone example for those who may be using one as their player since I actually primarily play through my SuperMini PMP, which has both a balanced and a normal output jack - and on that balanced output (4.3v peak-to-peak), there about five volume steps between the 400S and 400I - but both headphones are entirely engaged.
For me, it was basically the warmer characterization and easier-to-drive advantage that got me to pull the trigger on the 400S. Now owning the 400I, those decision points do remain valid.
Once again, the warm vs cool is only by manner of relative degrees to each other, yet still perceptible even after full burn-in periods. The 400S has a slight tonal edge diffusion under that warmer cast, whereas the 400I maintains distinctly crisp tonal separation. I went through a large number of A/B tracks spanning the music genres, but the one I ended up focusing on the most was Rogier's Polychoral Works (24bit/88.2KHz Hi Res FLAC) as exemplifying the difference. Even during the choral crescendos with various brass timbres, I can still distinctly pick out each element and positioning, right down to the natural vocal sibilants (neither set has any artificially induced sibilance). Thus the whole "analytical" reference that gets tossed about a lot by others.
With the 400S, the brass tends to merge with the male vocals, and those vocal sibilants are far more demure. Naturally, the 400S is less prone to fatigue the ear when presented with a predominance of soaring mids and highs. About an hour of listening to those choral works on the 400I, and I was done. The powerful Magnificat sopranos did me in.
Aside from that,
* Both sets are of the exact same construction materials, right down to the plastic extension arms and housing. Only a color difference between the 400S space gray versus the 400I shiny & matte black.
* Both have the same head grip, weight, and great comfort level.
* Both come with a single 5 foot, heavily braided L-jack 3.5mm to split L & R 3.5mm balanced cord, just the one with the 400I is black, whereas the 400S is gray and black striped (apparently attempting to match the headset coloring - doesn't come off so well as the all black cord).
* Far nicer presentational packaging for the 400I with a fancy flip-up leatherette hard box that doubles as attractive storage. The 400S is merely a product box with a foam insert inside.
Subjectively, I still prefer the 400S. I am merely rather susceptible to ear fatigue, thus my predilection for warmer sound. Black Friday drop in 400I pricing notwithstanding, I would have to say the $340 total price for the 400S (including the FocusPad replacements) over the normal $450 tag on the 400I makes the 400S a sure thing for those who share my own audio preferences.
Nevertheless, for sitting down and really studying a piece of music, or for those who prefer a cooler transparency, the 400I does get my strong approval. Also, does make a rather excellent wired TV headset for hearing dialogue over heavy thematic music backing.
**Update 07December2016 - upped my rating from 4 stars to a full 5 stars. As inferred in my earlier text, I have been using the 400I as a set of "TV Headphones" since its mid range clarity is a marvel for hearing dialogue even over poorly mixed thematic music. Recently, I added a TOPPING NX3 headphone amp to the audio line, an amp that sports a bass boost toggle (a welcomed low end plumpness for movies & gaming), and additionally providing a thin warm veil to the overall sound - but without sacrificing the distinct tonal separation and spatial transparency. I find myself loving this combination more so than my living room speaker setup!**
So there you have it. Hopefully this helps you decide which Hifiman variant is best suited for you without having to search & slog through all the review material like I did in the beginning.
Read more
|
Defending the honor of the much maligned HD700!!!!!!!!!!!! Or just my stupid opinions in the form of facts.....
By
Amazon Customer
on
September 29, 2016
Style: Headphones
Package Type: Standard Packaging
Verified Purchase
A grossly underrated headphone!
for years I read the horror stories about the hd700 and it's "ear bleeding" sibilance. I've seen people say its like ice picks to their ear drums. others say it's like a devil's dentist drill, shredding their ear drums (no joke!). and lets not even bring up the frequency response graphs.....
I always thought the reviews seemed odd, could it really be that bad? at that time the 700 was well over $750, which was way out of my budget. but the recent prices (got mine for $430) brought it down to my level. why not, I figured. I could always return it if it was as bad as "they" say.
well, guess what? it's not bad. nope, not at all. actually it's good. how good? quite good! hd800 good? no, but then again it wasn't supposed to be that good. if it was, why even have the 800? $1000 good? no, I wont go that far. $500 good? oh yeah! now we're talking.
I wont go into super detail on the sound signature, as it's been done to death. instead I want to focus on what I feel are misconceptions, and parroting. and by parroting, I mean the epidemic online of people just regurgitating things they've read/heard, without having any first hand experience. just go on headfi, it's a popular parrot destination. and I strongly believe the hd700 is a victim of overaggressive parroting on many sites, not just headfi. a few early adopters didn't like the highs, and suddenly the hd700 was "like having ice picks in my ears". really?
lets get down to it, the highs. that's what most people considering this headphone want to know about. are they really that bad? for me, and my ears and ACTUAL experience, nope, not at all. I'm running my 700 on a bifrost 4490 and lyr 2 (gold lion tubes). tidal hd, and the most random list of music known to man. some good quality, some not so good (metal, get your quality up!). so how are the highs? crisp, detailed, extended, slightly warm. sibilant? no, not at all, at least for my old ears. I do hear the peaks others have described in great detail. but they don't pierce my ears. they don't cause me discomfort. sorry folks, the devil and his dental drill from hell are not shredding my eardrums. no ice picks either. I must be deaf, I guess, because I actually really like the highs. they offer a level of clarity and sparkle few of my other headphones can even come close to. I will admit the peaks on low quality recordings (metallica death magnetic) can get pretty intense. but I fault the recording more than the headphones. death magnetic is a clipped, shrill mess on most of my headphones.
so there you have it, the highs are pretty good. I wont lie, I was really nervous trying them on for the first time. I had the volume down so low I could barely hear anything. I was so worried the 700 would shred my eardrums. 5 minutes later I was at pretty obscene volume levels and not wincing at all. in comparison, my msr7 would be much more fatiguing and uncomfortable sounding at lesser volumes. even my q701 sounds harsher up top than the hd700.
ok mids/lows, i'll be more concise. mids are ever so slightly recessed, or maybe just neutral. but they definitely sound farther away than my alpha prime, q701, and pm3. those three are my mid range masters. but the 700's mids are still beautiful sounding. warm, detailed, with great weight and texture. vocals are glorious, even if I do feel I'm sitting a few rows back from where I'd like to be. bass is excellent. it's tight, with fast decay, and almost planar like in it's detail. believe it or not, I was more surprised by the bass than I was the highs. I had that feeling the commotion about the highs were exaggeration. but no one talked about the bass. and the bass just blew me away with it's depth and texture. I honestly put the bass on these right up there with my all time bass favorite, my alpha prime. the prime doesn't have the deepest bass, but to my ears, it's the most detailed and textured. well the 700 isn't as good, but boy does it come close.
the soundstage is just as exquisite as you've read elsewhere. it's wide, it's deep, it's precise. if the hd800 didn't exist, it would probably be the best soundstage out there. it's that good.
at 150ohms, the 700 doesn't need a ton of power, but an amp is required. I tried plugging into my iphone 6s and got so so volume levels, and absolutely dead dynamics. it was pretty lifeless, as I expected. I tried it on my dragonfly black. more volume, more dynamics, but still not that great. bass was flubby (it's a word!). highs did pierce. soundstage was tight. those drivers wanted more power. ok, dragonfly red. whoa..... the red is actually powering this thing pretty well! had to lower the volume a lot. the whole sound experience exploded. the stage expanded, the highs smoothed out, the bass tightened up, and it actually sounded....well, good! ok, lets get these on the big rig (bifrost/lyr). WHOA..... take everything I said about the red, and it did it more. finally, the drivers had all the power they needed. the bass now had it's planar like speed and precision. highs further smoothed. extended? yes? harsh? no no no. well not until a death magnetic track came on my shuffled playlist. that made me turn down the volume, I wont lie.
bottom line, for under $500, the hd700 is a killer headphone. it's not the eardrum killer it's reputation suggests. maybe sennheiser did a mid cycle retuning? I suspect so, as all the 2012-2013 reviews were critical. then the 700 seemed to garner refreshed interest around 2015-2016, and those reviews were far more positive. my guess is a few factors are at play here. first, I'm guessing it had a retune around 2014/2015. sennheiser is notorious for retuning their headphone without any press releases or model number changes. please, sennheiser, stop that! I love the fact that you're improving your products. just tell us! second, I think the graph lovers unfairly crucified the set. there were some prominent figures in the audio world who absolutely hated the uneven frequency peaks on the 700. next thing you know, the parrots were out in full force spouting off about graph peaks. and that leads me to my last point, the parrots. if you've spent any time researching the 700 online, you'll have run across the big audio forums like headfi, changstar, sbaf, reddit, etc. and what do you find there? 99% parrots. how many times have I read people say "I've read" or "I heard", when talking about the hd700, and none of them have any firsthand experience with it. I'm not saying there is no useful information there, because there is. you just need to know who's parroting and who's actually speaking from experience.
and that leaves me with this last point, then i'll get off my soapbox. we all hear differently. add to that we all enjoy different sonic signatures. what's bass heavy to one person might be bass light to another, and so on. so I end with this, everything I've said applies to MY OPINIONS FROM FIRSTHAND USE of the hd700. for me, its great. you might like it, you might not. don't take anything here as fact. until YOU put them on and listen for yourself, you wont know the facts FOR YOU. deep breath...stepping off the soapbox......good night......
Read more
|
The best purchase of mine!
By
Bui Hai Anh
on
December 15, 2016
Size: 250 OHM Pro
Color: Silver
Verified Purchase
Wow, the first time I put it on... booom! It was like, the thick blanket around my ears through the years had finally been lifted. Everything is so clear, I can really hear the singers inhaling, moving their lips and tongues, and the fingers caressing the strings.
I listen to all kind of music, ranging from classical to rock, metal (think of Dimmu Borgir, Wintersun, Amorphis...) and everything in between. My quest was to find a detailed, revealing headphone, and I A/Bed several headphones in stores, using Fiio X3 2nd gen as I tried to find something efficient enough without the need of amplifier:
* Sennheiser HD598: smooth, but boring for most rock with virtually no bass.
* Audio-Technica ATH-M50x: overrated, the sound was too constricted and the bass was bloated. It gave me headache just after 5 minutes of listening.
* Grado sr80e: Gosh! It was like somebody was using chainsaw right beside my ears. Couldn't stand 1 minute.
* Grado sr325e: smoother than sr80e, OK but a bit too metallic to me.
* V-Moda M100: OK, good thumps, a bit less detailed than HD598 and sr325e. Looks good too.
* Sennheiser Momentum On Ear: the bass was very good, detailed, strong, fast, but the mids was a letdown, too distant and overwhelmed by the bass. I could not enjoy any classical piece with it.
* Audeze Sine: perhaps the Fiio X3 2nd could not handle that, because this headphone sounded like a $30 to me.
I also own Sony XBA-A3 - a hybrid IEM with one 16mm dynamic driver and two balanced armature ones, and Skullcandy Grind. To me, the DT 880 is clearer by a wide margin, to the point that I use it to see the differences more than to enjoy the music. You can find the frequency response graphs of DT 880 and equalize it to achieve a smoother experience (that is, increase the bass and decrease the treble around 8kHz for better thump and less sibilance) without losing detail.
I use the DT 880 mostly for films and classical music, and when my head is strong enough, rock and metal. The details are sometimes excessive, so to listen to music to relax, I use the XBA-A3 for a stronger (but slower) bass and smooth treble. The Skullcandy Grind is only for audiobook on my phone, merely because of the convenience (easy to put on/off, has button on the phone) as the bass on this phone is too much for any kind of music (good for those who want Beats bass but lack the money).
Read more
|
Great Sound Signature and Design for Tinnitus Sufferers & Other Observations
By
Tinfoot
on
November 10, 2016
Verified Purchase
[[VIDEOID:5ba08363dab70b67016bbad9d5860870]]Have owned for about a month now, and given them the full burn-in period. And in sum, I've now grown pretty dissatisfied with my other closed-back and semi-open cans - the HE 400S has absolutely spoilt me with its wide, airy soundstage. Also, as a tinnitus sufferer, the spacious sound and physical design has not whatsoever exacerbated attacks into ear screeching levels (something my more confined sets were starting to become potential problem with). In fact, I found the overall sound signature quite soothing and effectively masking. My tinnitus is why I wanted to purchase circumaural open-backs in the first place.
WHY I BOUGHT THE HE 400S OVER OTHER OPTIONS
When I first began looking at open-back headphones, I had limited my purchasing choices to the Sennheiser HD 650, Hifiman HE 400S and the 400i. Pricing wasn't a major point, though influential. I did determine pretty quickly that I wanted to try planar, so the HD 650 was dismissed, leaving the 400S and the 400i to decide between. I read all the reviews, browsed all the audiophile forums that spoke about both, considered the specifications carefully, and still wasn't sure which I wanted. The tipping point for me was actually a single, simple statement I read on a forum thread - "If you like warmer sound, the HE 400S. Cooler sound, the HE 400i."
Always favored spectrum warmth over analytical coolness, even if it is mere degrees of difference, so it was the HE 400S that got my money.
AUDIO SOURCE
My music files run the gamut from Hi Res FLAC 96KHz/24bit to the usual MP3 240kbps, and all have been treated equally by the inherent aural characteristics, leaving any differences purely dependent on the recording fidelity. I primarily run the HE 400S through my Hfiman SuperMini PMP that has both a balanced & normal output, and these are driven with ease through the balanced (4.3v peak-to-peak) port, which was what I had fully expected (the 400i should also be as well driven). However, the 400S sound equally great through my Samsung Galaxy S6 audio port, either with the in-built or a separate software DAC. But plugged into a few different low end MP3 players and tablets with already questionable hardware, yeah... these sound like junk. Point is, I fully believe these can be sufficiently driven by a typical **quality** smartphone, tablet, etcetera audio port and internal DAC.
EARPADS
I did end up purchasing the standard FocusPad (Non-A) earpads after 20 some days to replace the stock all-velour earpads. I dithered whether or not to purchase the additional earpads at the same time as the HE 400S, but I wanted to first to get a strong idea of how the stock sounded. I also felt it was a bit cheesy in having to throw another $40 on top of the price right out of the gate.
Although I had found the all-velour pads pleasing enough with Classical/New Age/Ambient music, when it came to more beat-driven music (Classic Rock, drum dependent ambient, and so on), the bottom didn't have the presence I wanted. Thus I decided to give the FocusPad a try. You can read my review on the Amazon product page for the FocusPad for more details; in essence, the low frequencies went from a demurely flat sound to more energetic forward emphasized fullness. Talking relative degrees here, so anyone who wants thumping resonant bass still shouldn't bother. Nor would I recommend buying the separate earpads right off. You probably will (heh), but I would still say first give the stock a good run.
As an aside, you can separately buy the stock all-velour earpads for $10 here on Amazon. The best way to get additional mounting rings since the velour is simply glued onto the ring, so easy to peel off and stick into another earpad brand. Just be absolutely aware that the circumaural rings are 110mm all the way around, so the oval Brainwavz 110mm*80mm earpads proved nigh impossible to fit without physical modification.
HEADPHONE CABLE
The stock headphone cable is heavy duty and weighty. It is a typical three pole L-jack that splits into L & R jacks that are also three pole, yet the HE 400S only engages the mono pin. Other words, the mono L & R replacement cords like what are sold for the Sennheiser HD750 are the appropriate ones. I've already tried replacing the cord with a lighter, more flexible one, but had to quickly return it due to poor wiring. If anyone can drop a comment about a solid quality replacement cord that isn't so thick and ungainly, I would be thankful.
OTHER NOTES
Be aware that there is zero noise isolation. You will hear your keyboard, your air conditioner, your family walking and talking, even at higher volumes. Sound leakage, on the other hand, is far less than I would have expected. Not what you want in a quiet library, but I would guess perhaps 1/3rd ~ 1/4th of the relative dB you hear leaks out from the cans.
As an eyeglass wearer, I can wear the set for literally hours and hours without the smallest comfort issue with either the stock or the FocusPad earpads. I am a hat size 7 ~ 7 1/8 for head size reference.
No case is included. A good economical fit has been [[ASIN:B009NE7B06 Slappa Full-Sized HardBody PRO Headphone Case]].
Why do I rate at four stars? I still frown over spending the $40 on the FocusPad, which is apparently the *stock* earpad for the HE 400i. Also, only including a single audio cord, one that, as well constructed as it is, still prompted me to kind of quickly start thinking about another cord. The lack of a case didn't really bother me, yet I do have to wonder at Hifiman cutting this much inclusion corner off.
Read more
|
![Sennheiser HD 650 Open Back Professional Headphone]({"https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81zggHtrqML._SY355_.jpg":[355,254],"https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81zggHtrqML._SY606_.jpg":[606,433],"https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81zggHtrqML._SY450_.jpg":[450,322],"https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81zggHtrqML._SY550_.jpg":[550,393],"https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81zggHtrqML._SY679_.jpg":[679,485]})
