Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Cables, Power, Tweaks, Speakers, Accessories (DBT-Free Forum) › Sennheiser HD650 Cable Shootout: Stock, Zu, Equinox and Grace Five Two
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sennheiser HD650 Cable Shootout: Stock, Zu, Equinox and Grace Five Two - Page 3

post #31 of 147
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by moj0
I see Voltron mentions the veil regarding HD650 while describing the Zu Mobius. Putting it into terms of stadium seating, if the stock cables were in the 10th row, would any of these cables help change the row position?
moj0-
I am assuming you want to move closer to the music, and I think all of the replacement options provide that improvement. The Zu brings music forward, but both the Equinox and G52 provide a bigger and deeper soundstage than the Zu. With the Equinox, I find the best feeling of sitting in the front row with the players arrayed in front of me, but the G52 does the same thing a little bit differently and to many people's preference.

tyrion-
Thanks Mike, and happy new year. I saw that you were a fan of the G52 and I agree that it is both very musical and really fun. I am wondering whether I should try it with the foams back in place to see how that sounds--I know I prefer the Equinox without them but I didn't think to try it that way. Maybe I will ask Myo what he prefers.
post #32 of 147
Hi there,

the cables are tested with the stock foam. I have not switched out the foam on my sennheisers. You may have better results with the GFT with the stock foams, as the intended sound of the cable was designed to be used with the stock sennheiser foam. This may be the reason why you hear a different balance. Removing the senn foam will create a different sound presentation with the GFT then what was intended. I have not noticed any forward mid range with the GFT, but I use the stock sennheiser foam.
The sennheisers have a tendancy to become more forward when the foam is removed. The GFT was designed to balance the sound in a way to replicate music, I personally find enjoyable compared to live music and soundstage.

I have not heard the equinox however.

Maybe another impression write up of the GFT and equinox with the stock foams may be a fairer comparison

If it helps give you an idea of its sound, the test music I use for critical listening are acoutic, live, and electronic music.

Namely focused on instruments such as violins, stringed guitars, well recorded percussions and tracks with heavy vocal presence to help me accurately decipher the cables ability to replicate those in comparison to what I hear from my experience with real life performances. The electronica is used to test the cables ability to replicate the speed, notes, rythm, and bass clarity.
post #33 of 147
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RnB180
the cables are tested with the stock foam. I have not switched out the foam on my sennheisers. You may have better results with the GFT with the stock foams, as the intended sound of the cable was designed to be used with the stock sennheiser foam. This may be the reason why you hear a different balance. Removing the senn foam will create a different sound presentation with the GFT then what was intended. I have not noticed any forward mid range with the GFT, but I use the stock sennheiser foam. The sennheisers have a tendancy to become more forward when the foam is removed. The GFT was designed to balance the sound in a way to replicate music, I personally find enjoyable compared to live music and soundstage.

I have not heard the equinox however.

Maybe another impression write up of the GFT and equinox with the stock foams may be a fairer comparison
I am not sure you are saying that the comparison I did was unfair, but I don't think it was. I listened to the four cables with exactly the same setup for each song I compared, and the foams were removed the entire time. I am sure that the Equinox, Zu and certainly the stock cables were "voiced" with the foams in place, so every cable was on an equal footing. I just happen to like the sound without the foams, and I think that more music gets through that way.

I also feel like I have couched my comments about the slightly more forward/energetic midrange I experienced with the G52 enough to indicate it is not a complaint or criticism but an observation about the sound signature. Indeed, I noted in another post in response to Glod that his description of that characteristic was very accurate and that the slightly more lively presentation itself might account for the midrange energy seeming higher. Also, I mentioned in my response to tyrion that I think it is likely the G52 would sound different with the foams replaced.

I returned the G52 to PFKMan23 last week, so I do not have one available to test this out. But, if you want to send me a production model along with the prototype, I would be happy to listen again and add some notes on the effect.
post #34 of 147
Hi there,

I was just offering a possibility as to why you may have found the GFT a bit more forward, since foam topic was brought up. I was actually not going to mention anything but since I was asked prior I wrote an explaination.

The Sennheisers, in stock form has a laidback distant sound. but removing the stock foam, the sound presentation changes.

The GFT however was designed to be used in combination with the stock foam. Which may or may not have attributed to the different balance you have heard.

so if you would like to test it in a comparison, I believe the GFT with stock foam, may have helped with any unbalanced areas that you heard. , so if a 3 way shootout were to be done, if you enjoyed the equinox more without the foam then with the foam, you just might have enjoyed the GFT more with the foam then with out. Its always best to test the cable in a way it was designed to be used.
post #35 of 147
Wonderful review, Voltron! And to think, you almost made it before midnight! You missed only by 5 minutes.

You've done an exceptional job at describing the essential character of each of these cables (to your ears of course, and you were always careful to point that out). I'm sure this will be helpful to anyone who is interested in the Zu, Equinox, or Grace Five Two cables (keeping in mind that the prototype you tested differs from the current model available from RnB180).
post #36 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wmcmanus
Wonderful review, Voltron! And to think, you almost made it before midnight! You missed only by 5 minutes.

You've done an exceptional job at describing the essential character of each of these cables (to your ears of course, and you were always careful to point that out). I'm sure this will be helpful to anyone who is interested in the Zu, Equinox, or Grace Five Two cables (keeping in mind that the prototype you tested differs from the current model available from RnB180).
Wayne, I believe you are a bit confused. The GF2 cable that he tested for the comparo was my personal cable which is a current production Grace Five Two. The prototype cable that he is talking about is a earlier prototype that Myo has, that supposedly sounds closer to the Equinox.
post #37 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wmcmanus
Wonderful review, Voltron! And to think, you almost made it before midnight! You missed only by 5 minutes.

You've done an exceptional job at describing the essential character of each of these cables (to your ears of course, and you were always careful to point that out). I'm sure this will be helpful to anyone who is interested in the Zu, Equinox, or Grace Five Two cables (keeping in mind that the prototype you tested differs from the current model available from RnB180).
If we could only get a certain someone to give up the stash of Senn replacement cables so that we could do a shootout between them all.

Voltron, if I was able to get ahold of some other replacement cables I could send you my production G52 (I hate to give it up but would for the greater good).
post #38 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by RnB180
The GFT however was designed to be used in combination with the stock foam. Which may or may not have attributed to the different balance you have heard.
I have replaced the foam with a pieces from tights. There's definitely not a big difference but I can hear it. I think it's effect to forwardness is close to nothing. The biggest difference after replacing the foam is that the highs get little bit clearer and brighter.

After all I like this modded version better.
post #39 of 147
Thread Starter 
Thanks Wayne, and it was still 2006 here in California when I posted! As PFK points out, I used the production RnB cable for the comparison. I am just curious about the proto because Myo described it to me and offered to let me try it out.

Thanks for the very kind and self-sacrificing offer Mike, but I think that PFK and I will be getting together pretty soon so I can check out the Grace52 with the foams back in place. Just logically, I would imagine that the Grace52 could sound better to me than the Equinox with the foams in place because the Equinox is more laid back already and the 650s tendency that way is also increased with the foams.
post #40 of 147
Hi Voltron,
I apologize for my prior responses as it may be uncalled for.
I feel your review is very fair and well written, I appreciate the time that was put into the comparison and hope that it will supply good ideas for those wondering what each sound like.

Patu has already commented on the differences with and without the foam. I would not doubt the differences will be very minor. Equinox is at the top for a reason!

Please do not go out of your way to conduct another review with the foam pads for my sake.

God bless,
myo
post #41 of 147
Thread Starter 
No apology needed, Myo! Everybody hears things differently, and I know there are plenty of people would do the exact same comparison I did and come out desparate to have a Grace Five Two. I wanted to be very clear that I was only comparing for my ears and my preferences, and that my "personal favorite" comments were not intended to be stated as definitive. I know that you know that, but I don't want to leave any doubt in the minds of others reading this thread. Plus, after all that critical listening there was only a slight edge in my mind for the Equinox on certain things and the Grace won out in others--quite an accomplishment for you against a long-established product IMHO.

Now back to the foams. I actually believe that removing the foams causes a little more than just a minor change as Patu suggests, so I am still very curious to hear the Grace with foams in place. If my friend tyrion has gone through the Equinox and then the Zu and now "couldn't be happier" with the Grace, then I want to hear how it sounds the way you intended it to be heard.
post #42 of 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voltron
If my friend tyrion has gone through the Equinox and then the Zu and now "couldn't be happier" with the Grace, then I want to hear how it sounds the way you intended it to be heard.
I couldn't be happier and will not be parting with my Grace. However, the Equinox was my first cable and I haven't heard one in at least a year so I have no basis for comparison.

Buy the Grace, it's a great cable at a great price built by a good guy.
post #43 of 147
in order to get maximum benefit of $$$, i read the review.
i've decided to defoam the headphones : )
post #44 of 147
Wow, cool review. I need to stop by this forum more regularly.
post #45 of 147
Excellent review! I'll surely come back to it when looking for a Sennheiser cable.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Cables, Power, Tweaks, Speakers, Accessories (DBT-Free Forum) › Sennheiser HD650 Cable Shootout: Stock, Zu, Equinox and Grace Five Two