or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Sennheiser HD650 Impressions Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sennheiser HD650 Impressions Thread - Page 209

post #3121 of 36889
Quote:
Originally Posted by LugBug1 View Post


Ok miss scarypants or what ever you call yourself, YOU may well be able to hear a difference with your LCD choker cable and "high end" resolving gear. But I am speaking for the majority of 650 owners who have budget to mid equipment. Equipment that matches. If you knew anything about the 650's which you clearly don't then you would know that they where designed to be mp3 friendly. That means that they were designed to smooth over low bit recordings. So, lets just forget about your higher than all the rest of us set up for the moment and consider us mere mortals listening with our paupers set ups: we can spend all day converting our mp3's to flac- but for what you will get in return... it will be a waste of time. 

 

I wouldn't consider the MF V Dac and MF Xcan 3 nasty equipment.            

 

 

That's just your opinion. One I also disagree with.
 

 

post #3122 of 36889
Quote:
Originally Posted by LugBug1 View Post





Ok miss scarypants or what ever you call yourself, YOU may well be able to hear a difference with your LCD choker cable and "high end" resolving gear. But I am speaking for the majority of 650 owners who have budget to mid equipment. Equipment that matches. If you knew anything about the 650's which you clearly don't then you would know that they where designed to be mp3 friendly. That means that they were designed to smooth over low bit recordings. So, lets just forget about your higher than all the rest of us set up for the moment and consider us mere mortals listening with our paupers set ups: we can spend all day converting our mp3's to flac- but for what you will get in return... it will be a waste of time. 

 

I wouldn't consider the MF V Dac and MF Xcan 3 nasty equipment.            

 


Ok Mr lovebugs or whatever you call yourself I never said I was above anyone else I was making the point that yes you can hear the difference between different bitrate music on the 650's if you take offense to that thats your problem.
I have had the HD650's for 4 years and until recently was running them off of an Ibasso D6 and I could hear the difference on a portable amp so if you cannot hear the difference Mr Nastytone I suggest you get your ears cleaned out. Now have a nice day
Edited by MrScary - 5/7/11 at 10:57am
post #3123 of 36889
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrScary View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by LugBug1 View Post





Ok miss scarypants or what ever you call yourself, YOU may well be able to hear a difference with your LCD choker cable and "high end" resolving gear. But I am speaking for the majority of 650 owners who have budget to mid equipment. Equipment that matches. If you knew anything about the 650's which you clearly don't then you would know that they where designed to be mp3 friendly. That means that they were designed to smooth over low bit recordings. So, lets just forget about your higher than all the rest of us set up for the moment and consider us mere mortals listening with our paupers set ups: we can spend all day converting our mp3's to flac- but for what you will get in return... it will be a waste of time. 

 

I wouldn't consider the MF V Dac and MF Xcan 3 nasty equipment.            

 




Ok Mr lovebugs or whatever you call yourself I never said I was above anyone else I was making the point that yes you can hear the difference between different bitrate music on the 650's if you take offense to that thats your problem.
I have had the HD650's for 4 years and until recently was running them off of an Ibasso D6 and I could hear the difference on a portable amp so if you cannot hear the difference Mr Nastytone I suggest you get your ears cleaned out. Now have a nice day



ha ha I like it biggrin.gif this is what forums are good for.. letting a bit of steam off. No hard feelings scarypants.

 

You may be right, I may need to get my ears cleaned out. But I cannot tell a difference between flac and 320... I just can not!!

post #3124 of 36889
Quote:
Originally Posted by LugBug1 View Post





ha ha I like it biggrin.gif this is what forums are good for.. letting a bit of steam off. No hard feelings scarypants.

 

You may be right, I may need to get my ears cleaned out. But I cannot tell a difference between flac and 320... I just can not!!


hahaha I do know what you mean by the HD650's being veiled I guess I have always had bright soudning sources even the Ibasso D6 was bright with the Topflight kit so its possible Im hearing just a tad difference... Now with my LCD-2's I hear everything which is not really a good thing with old recordings ... NO hard feelings I was just jazzing you a bit biggrin.gif
post #3125 of 36889




The sound of the HD650 is a combination of your source your DAC your AMP and then the HD650 you make it sound like the HD650 is so veiled that it cannot pick up the difference between an MP3 and a FLAC file are you also going to say that it cannot determine the difference between a 44 file and a 96/24 file?

You must have read my post wrong. I said that I find it highly unlikely that anyone could tell the difference between 320 kbps MP3's and FLAC files. We're  not talking about 192kbps Mp3 and FLAC. This is on the HD-650 ONLY. Of course for those that can, good for you. I just think it's wrong to give people the impression that the HD-650 are so revealing and detailed that people should go out and re-rip their files from 320 to Lossless. Of course, Lossless is ALWAYS best even if you don''t hear a difference and can spare the space. I'm sure hearing the difference between the two is possible, but on the HD-650 it's less likely.

 

I think the HD-650 are fairly revealing and have a lot of detail, but its nothing too excessive. They're the more forgiving headphone I own. I shouldn't have posted, but I had to just say something. I'd hate for someone to buy the HD-650 expecting tons of detail out of Mid-Fi gear. Does anyone actually buy an HD-650 because of how revealing and detailed it is? Doubt it.

 

FYI I do think the HD-650 needs 320kbps MP3's or FLAC to sound its best. I mean for a $329 headphone, why not? Sure I think it's quite easy to tell the difference between say 192, 256kbps and FLAC, but the HD-650 is still fairly revealing, but still fairly forgiving. At one point I felt that 256kbps MP3s were fine, but I didnt have any $250+ headphones. When I got better headphones I ripped everything to 320. When I got even better headphones I ripped them all again to FLAC normal_smile%20.gif Not sure if I heard any difference, but I stopped trying to analyze everything a few months ago. I think it was actually the DJ100 or DT-880 that made me want to rip everything to Lossless. I still can't get over how bad some of the stuff in my collection sounded with the DT-880. Super easy to weed out the garbage tracks. Some recordings are so horrible though that updating them from 256kbps mp3 to FLAC doesn't help much. Some of the music from the 90's sounds very bad. Super brightly recorded and harsh Jpop sounds great on the HD-650, even more so on the HD-600 though normal_smile%20.gif

 


 

 


Edited by tdockweiler - 5/7/11 at 11:48am
post #3126 of 36889

The best upgrade I ever made for the HD650's that bested every $1K+ dac/amp/cable out there was...

 

weed.

 

Oh and a vaporizer.

 

 

post #3127 of 36889
Quote:
Originally Posted by tdockweiler View Post

You must have read my post wrong. I said that I find it highly unlikely that anyone could tell the difference between 320 kbps MP3's and FLAC files. We're  not talking about 192kbps Mp3 and FLAC. This is on the HD-650 ONLY. Of course for those that can, good for you. I just think it's wrong to give people the impression that the HD-650 are so revealing and detailed that people should go out and re-rip their files from 320 to Lossless. Of course, Lossless is ALWAYS best even if you don''t hear a difference and can spare the space. I'm sure hearing the difference between the two is possible, but on the HD-650 it less likely.

 

I think the HD-650 are fairly revealing and have a lot of detail, but its nothing too excessive. They're the more forgiving headphone I own. I shouldn't have posted, but I had to just say something. I'd hate for someone to buy the HD-650 expecting tons of detail out of Mid-Fi gear. Does anyone actually buy an HD-650 because of how revealing and detailed it is? Doubt it.

 


 

 



YOu are right I should have read your post better I agree that with the HD650's being Midfi you are not going to hear the difference between a 320k mp3 and a 1000k + flac file unles your source equipment is very resolving the HD650's do
however adjust quite a bit to your source gear.

My 650's sit on their stand now and look pretty I will never sell them but dont use them anymore due to exactly what you said they are not that revealing.. Well I do use them for playing guitar though my line 6 equipment when I cant have the amp on but as of late I just use some old Ultrasone 700's for that
Edited by MrScary - 5/7/11 at 11:41am
post #3128 of 36889
Quote:
Originally Posted by LugBug1 View Post





Ok miss scarypants or what ever you call yourself, YOU may well be able to hear a difference with your LCD choker cable and "high end" resolving gear. But I am speaking for the majority of 650 owners who have budget to mid equipment. Equipment that matches. If you knew anything about the 650's which you clearly don't then you would know that they where designed to be mp3 friendly. That means that they were designed to smooth over low bit recordings. So, lets just forget about your higher than all the rest of us set up for the moment and consider us mere mortals listening with our paupers set ups: we can spend all day converting our mp3's to flac- but for what you will get in return... it will be a waste of time.

I wouldn't consider the MF V Dac and MF Xcan 3 nasty equipment.


Very presumptious of you to think you can speak for the "majority of owners who have budget to mid equipment". Although my setup is well regarded by some who've heard higher end gear, it is still very modest compared to others. I'm not going to argue the merits of mp3 vs lossless, but some of you are clearly confused about the HD650's capabilities and the very important relationship it has with ALL components in your chain (not just the amp).

It's very apparent to me, even on my budget setup, how revealing the HD650 is and how responsive it is to changes in configuration or components in your setup. The infamous veil isn't there to make your crappy setup sound tolerable. It's there because you have a bottleneck in your chain.

Having said that, I don't believe you need to spend big bucks to get a sense of what the HD650 is capable of. All the conditions I've described above I can replicate with my modest gear. Careful consideration of how I configure my setup yields distinct results that either synergize fantastically with these cans or reveal defiencies not to my liking.

These are revealing cans, and they don't need exaggerated treble to convey the false sense of detail - you just need gear resolving enough to show you things as they are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tdockweiler View Post

You must have read my post wrong. I said that I find it highly unlikely that anyone could tell the difference between 320 kbps MP3's and FLAC files. We're not talking about 192kbps Mp3 and FLAC. This is on the HD-650 ONLY. Of course for those that can, good for you. I just think it's wrong to give people the impression that the HD-650 are so revealing and detailed that people should go out and re-rip their files from 320 to Lossless. Of course, Lossless is ALWAYS best even if you don''t hear a difference and can spare the space. I'm sure hearing the difference between the two is possible, but on the HD-650 it's less likely.

I think the HD-650 are fairly revealing and have a lot of detail, but its nothing too excessive. They're the more forgiving headphone I own. I shouldn't have posted, but I had to just say something. I'd hate for someone to buy the HD-650 expecting tons of detail out of Mid-Fi gear. Does anyone actually buy an HD-650 because of how revealing and detailed it is? Doubt it.

FYI I do think the HD-650 needs 320kbps MP3's or FLAC to sound its best. I mean for a $329 headphone, why not? Sure I think it's quite easy to tell the difference between say 192, 256kbps and FLAC, but the HD-650 is still fairly revealing, but still fairly forgiving. At one point I felt that 256kbps MP3s were fine, but I didnt have any $250+ headphones. When I got better headphones I ripped everything to 320. When I got even better headphones I ripped them all again to FLAC normal_smile%20.gif Not sure if I heard any difference, but I stopped trying to analyze everything a few months ago. I think it was actually the DJ100 or DT-880 that made me want to rip everything to Lossless. I still can't get over how bad some of the stuff in my collection sounded with the DT-880. Super easy to weed out the garbage tracks. Some recordings are so horrible though that updating them from 256kbps mp3 to FLAC doesn't help much. Some of the music from the 90's sounds very bad. Super brightly recorded and harsh Jpop sounds great on the HD-650, even more so on the HD-600 though normal_smile%20.gif



You need to get a good DAC.
Edited by olor1n - 5/7/11 at 5:30pm
post #3129 of 36889


Very presumptious of you to think you can speak for the "majority of owners who have budget to mid equipment". Although my setup is well regarded by some who've heard higher end gear, it is still very modest compared to others. I'm not going to argue the merits of mp3 vs lossless, but some of you are clearly confused about the HD650's capabilities and the very important relationship it has with ALL components in your chain (not just the amp).

It's very apparent to me, even on my budget setup, how revealing the HD650 is and how responsive it is to changes in configuration or components in your setup. The infamous veil isn't there to make your crappy setup sound tolerable. It's there because you have a bottleneck in your chain.

Having said that, I don't believe you need to spend big bucks to get a sense of what the HD650 is capable of. All the conditions I've described above I can replicate with my modest gear. Careful consideration of how I configure my setup yields distinct results that either synergize fantastically with these cans or reveal defiencies not to my liking.

These are revealing cans, and they don't need exaggerated treble to convey the false sense of detail - you just need gear resolving enough to show you things as they are.
 

 

Nobody is saying these aren't revealing headphones. I think you may be a bit over-exaggerating how revealing these headphones are. Why mention even the veil? Nobody said here that it's there to make your mp3s sound good. We only said they're fairly forgiving. Are you saying you don't agree? Are you saying your gear is so good that you can tell the difference between 320kbps MP3 and FLAC on the HD-650 (ONLY!)? On the HD-650 with even a $1000 amp, I find that hard to believe. With the modest setup you say you have, that's even harder to believe. My pair really doesn't have this veil, but my old HD-600 did. What other headphones have you tried that are more revealing?

 

It's kind of funny how the veil suddenly goes away with burn-in, then it was a better source, or was it the cable or the amp? Someone seems to say something different every time as to how they removed this veil. My pair has perfect synergy with my amp, but I'm not going to lie and make them out to be better than they really are. It took me 3 amps to get them to sound great. If I wanted some sort of detail monster that's super revealing, I'd choose another headphone. I like how my HD-650 is fairly non-fatiguing and somewhat forgiving. It's a good headphone for sure and I've already found the proper gear for for mine.

 

It seems like many of these posts there are the usual ones where someone needs to talk down at someone who doesn't like the headphone as if they're new here and doesn't have a clue. If someone doesn't like them, then its poor synergy, a bad DAC or their source files. Or wait, they need a new $250 cable or $1000 amp. It doesn't have the soundstage of the K702 or HD-598? Get a new amp! As if every deficiency of the HD-650 can be fixed by upgrading your gear to something more expensive. I highly doubt the HD-650 could ever have the soundstage of the AD700 and K702. It would totally ruin it's sound signature. I am definitely a believer that bad amp synergy can keep someone from loving a headphone though. I didn't love my K702 and HD-650 until I got new amps.

 

It seems like I've heard it a million times where people just assume I'm only getting the impression of more detail on a brighter headphone because of it's treble. That's funny, my K601 has less treble and has more detail than the HD-650. No, I'm not saying the K601 is better, but I do like it more. HD-650 is technically better.

 

Then this thing about needing a new DAC because I can't hear the difference between a 320kbps MP3 and a FLAC file on the HD-650. Ridiculous!

 

Sure, the HD-650 is revealing, but it's not THAT revealing. I do think they're meant to be fairly forgiving, but to a point. No, I don't mean they'll sound good with 64kbps MP3 files.

 

So tell me this. Do you think these are more revealing and detailed than a K702 and DT-880? That's a serious question. I already know my answer, but I'm wonder what all of you think? Ok, now I've probably opened up a whole new can of worms.

 

Basically to me, the price of a headphone doesnt always determine how detailed and revealing a headphone is. Sorry if you don't agree. It usually does, but not always. I've had $300 headphones that were not as detailed as my $70 AD700. It's also interesting how my HD-598 can often pick up recording hiss, but on my HD-650 it's much more difficult. Don't tell me that it's just bad amp synergy, because it's not. I don't want the HD-650 to be this revealing and for many of us, thats a plus. On my $80 DJ100 there's detail that even the HD-650 cant pick up. Sorry if any of you don't want to believe me. I often do detailed comparisons between headphones because I'm stupid and love to waste my time. DJ100 loses out to the K702, DT-880 and KRK KNS-8400 though.

 

Ok, I probably coming across as a jerk, but it's not my intention. I do actually love the HD-650 now, but I do prefer the K601 for most of my music. I listen to both equally, but the HD-650 is slightly better for female vocals with my amp, which makes up a huge percentage of my music. HD-650 and K702 are the only two headphones I've had that made me buy new amps and build some cables. Hopefully it all ends soon. At least I stopped trying to over-analyze my headphones long ago.
 

 


Edited by tdockweiler - 5/7/11 at 8:01pm
post #3130 of 36889
Quote:
Originally Posted by tdockweiler View Post

 

Nobody is saying these aren't revealing headphones. I think you may be a bit over-exaggerating how revealing these headphones are. Why mention even the veil? Nobody said here that it's there to make your mp3s sound good. We only said they're fairly forgiving. Are you saying you don't agree? Are you saying your gear is so good that you can tell the difference between 320kbps MP3 and FLAC on the HD-650 (ONLY!)? On the HD-650 with even a $1000 amp, I find that hard to believe. With the modest setup you say you have, that's even harder to believe. My pair really doesn't have this veil, but my old HD-600 did. What other headphones have you tried that are more revealing?

 

It's kind of funny how the veil suddenly goes away with burn-in, then it was a better source, or was it the cable or the amp? Someone seems to say something different every time as to how they removed this veil. My pair has perfect synergy with my amp, but I'm not going to lie and make them out to be better than they really are. It took me 3 amps to get them to sound great. If I wanted some sort of detail monster that's super revealing, I'd choose another headphone. I like how my HD-650 is fairly non-fatiguing and somewhat forgiving. It's a good headphone for sure and I've already found the proper gear for for mine.

 

It seems like many of these posts there are the usual ones where someone needs to talk down at someone who doesn't like the headphone as if they're new here and doesn't have a clue. If someone doesn't like them, then its poor synergy, a bad DAC or their source files. Or wait, they need a new $250 cable or $1000 amp. It doesn't have the soundstage of the K702 or HD-598? Get a new amp! As if every deficiency of the HD-650 can be fixed by upgrading your gear to something more expensive. I highly doubt the HD-650 could ever have the soundstage of the AD700 and K702. It would totally ruin it's sound signature. I am definitely a believer that bad amp synergy can keep someone from loving a headphone though. I didn't love my K702 and HD-650 until I got new amps.

 

It seems like I've heard it a million times where people just assume I'm only getting the impression of more detail on a brighter headphone because of it's treble. That's funny, my K601 has less treble and has more detail than the HD-650. No, I'm not saying the K601 is better, but I do like it more. HD-650 is technically better.

 

Then this thing about needing a new DAC because I can't hear the difference between a 320kbps MP3 and a FLAC file on the HD-650. Ridiculous!

 

Sure, the HD-650 is revealing, but it's not THAT revealing. I do think they're meant to be fairly forgiving, but to a point. No, I don't mean they'll sound good with 64kbps MP3 files.

 

So tell me this. Do you think these are more revealing and detailed than a K702 and DT-880? That's a serious question. I already know my answer, but I'm wonder what all of you think? Ok, now I've probably opened up a whole new can of worms.

 

Basically to me, the price of a headphone doesnt always determine how detailed and revealing a headphone is. Sorry if you don't agree. It usually does, but not always. I've had $300 headphones that were not as detailed as my $70 AD700. It's also interesting how my HD-598 can often pick up recording hiss, but on my HD-650 it's much more difficult. Don't tell me that it's just bad amp synergy, because it's not. I don't want the HD-650 to be this revealing and for many of us, thats a plus. On my $80 DJ100 there's detail that even the HD-650 cant pick up. Sorry if any of you don't want to believe me. I often do detailed comparison between headphones because I'm stupid and love to waste my time. DJ100 loses out to the K702 and KRK KNS-8400 though.

 

Ok, I probably coming across as a jerk, but it's not my intention. I do actually love the HD-650 now, but I do prefer the K601 for most of my music. I listen to both equally, but the HD-650 is slightly better for female vocals with my amp, which makes up a huge percentage of my music. HD-650 and K702 are the only two headphones I've had that made me buy new amps and build some cables. Hopefully it all ends soon. At least I stopped trying to over-analyze my headphones long ago.
 

 



You've been spewing your schizophrenic ramblings for some time, all the while ignoring the sound advice that's been imparted to possibly alleviate your dissatisfaction with these cans. What you hear are the sum of the parts, and an amp is merely one component in a chain. You've constantly missed this point, and it's clear that further discourse is futile.

 

How can someone as conflicted as you seem to be possibly enjoy the listening experience? I call shenanigans on your last statement.


Edited by olor1n - 5/7/11 at 8:26pm
post #3131 of 36889
Quote:
Originally Posted by olor1n View Post





You've been spewing your schizophrenic ramblings for some time, all the while ignoring the sound advice that's been imparted to possibly alleviate your dissatisfaction with these cans. What you hear are the sum of the parts, and an amp is merely one component in a chain. You've constantly missed this point, and it's clear that further discourse is futile.

 

How can someone as conflicted as you seem to be possibly enjoy the listening experience? I call shenanigans on your last statement.


hahahaha you guys are funny this is too much
post #3132 of 36889

Did you read any of my post or was it "TL;DR"? I guess so. I've said already that I've switched amps, equipment and even cables several times to get perfect synergy with my HD-650. This means I'm NOT dissatisfied with the HD-650. I'm just not willing to make up lies about how they're the most revealing headphone on earth which you seem to be doing. Making them into something they're not is a bit wrong.

 

BTW I'm not sure why you've blown this way out of proportion since all I did was ask questions. This isn't about ME here and I wasn't looking for advice.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by olor1n View Post





You've been spewing your schizophrenic ramblings for some time, all the while ignoring the sound advice that's been imparted to possibly alleviate your dissatisfaction with these cans. What you hear are the sum of the parts, and an amp is merely one component in a chain. You've constantly missed this point, and it's clear that further discourse is futile.

 

How can someone as conflicted as you are possibly enjoy the listening experience?



 


Edited by tdockweiler - 5/7/11 at 9:27pm
post #3133 of 36889
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrScary View Post

The sound of the HD650 is a combination of your source your DAC your AMP and then the HD650 you make it sound like the HD650 is so veiled that it cannot pick up the difference between an MP3 and a FLAC file are you also going to say that it cannot determine the difference between a 44 file and a 96/24 file?

Whoa. It was all fun and games until I read that part. Somebody is drinking the kool-aid. No - you cannot hear the difference between 16-bit vs 24-bit, unless the files are recorded from two different sources completely.

http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/415361/24bit-vs-16bit-the-myth-exploded
post #3134 of 36889

I don't know how different the HD595 is to the HD598, but I felt the HD650 had a bigger out of head sensation than the HD595...the HD595 was leaner or "brighter" through the mids, but the HD650 had better treble extension and was much smoother, the 595 being noticeably more grained.

 

I used my K701 to analyse my amps and sources...it was more able to reveal differences due to its leaner signature and larger soundstage...but once again I felt the HD650 was the more resolute can - yet it didn't reveal amp and source differences as effectively as the K701...I feel the HD650 had the more tactile and agile transducer overall. 

 

I'm not so certain I can pick out the differences between 320 mp3 and lossless...if I could, I wouldn't care, because it wouldn't effect how I enjoy music via the HD650.  Also because of the LCD2s a good amp and dac, 320 mp3s have sounded better than 24/96 on the HD650 in the same setup.

 

I never realised how good 320 mps could sound until I heard then through the LCD2s...I no longer have issues with using mp3s....considering the economics of obtaining music and the info superhighway, I now have nearly as many downloaded mp3 albums as CD lossless rips.

 

I also found MP3s to benefit from the Secret Rabbit Code upsampling through earlier versions of foobar to restore some of the lost ambience.


Edited by SP Wild - 5/7/11 at 10:01pm
post #3135 of 36889


If you ever get to try out the 598 at a meet in the future, I highly suggest it. Many people who tend to dislike Sennheiser stuff love the 598. I wasn't a fan of the the OLD HD-650, OLD HD-600 or modded HD-555 at all. I read some reviews of the 598 and that it had some forward sounding mids and just had to get it. Loved it immediately. Compared to the modded HD-555 the soundstage is MASSIVE! To me, the HD-598 is nothing like the HD-555 I had. For comparison I'd say the HD-598 soundstage is the 3rd biggest I've heard yet. The AD700 is the largest with the K702 being second. I loved the 598 immediately and it's what made me try the silver screened HD-650 out. I kept comparing it to the HD-600 and ended up with the HD-650 due to it being slightly more revealing and detailed than the HD-600. It took some work to tell the difference in how clear the sound of the HD-650 was compared to the HD-600. I prefer a more neutral headphone, but the HD-650 is close enough on the Micro Amp, but does change the mids a tad maybe. I never once felt the HD-650 was bass heavy. Before I ever tried the HD-650 I always thought it was.

 

The soundstage of my HD-650 on my Asgard was fairly closed in, but it improved with my E9 (somehow) and on the Micro Amp. I think the Micro Amp makes the HD-650 just the way I like it. The soundstage is quite large. I don't think it's larger than my K601's soundstage, but that's OK. The HD-650's soundstage with the 4 amps I've tried it with is smaller than that of the 598's by far. Not a big deal though. If a $600+ amp could make it larger than that of the 598 I'd be extremely impressed, but I don't think it's possible. I mean how would it be? That's like an amp TOTALLY transforming the HD-650! I do agree that a better amp makes it slightly larger, but I think there HAS to be a limit.

 

With my HD-650 I prefer CDs from my Oppo, but I guess I should do a 320kbps vs FLAC test again. I personally don't want to do this since I just want to enjoy my music. The HD-598, K601 and HD-650 make me just want to forget all this nit-picking. I think out of the dozens of headphones I've been with I've only come across maybe 2 or 3 that are perfect for ME and my preferences.

 

I'm not a huge fan of MP3 format, but I don't find 320kbps horrible. Despite using lossless, 320kbps is acceptable if it's absolutely required. I often download albums off Amazon MP3 that's too expensive to buy on CD and even the quality of those 256kbps files doesn't bother me too badly on the HD-650. 

 

If I could tell the difference between 320kbps and FLAC it'd be so minor that It probably wouldn't bother me. I often use an Ipod Touch during weight lifting and ALAC even on a 32gb player really hurts!

 

I bought some ambient music on Itunes a few months ago that was originally from Japan and the quality is just awful. I don't know who to blame. I buy all my music and often just get used CDs from Amazon. I found a few Cantopop CD originals (that are OOP) on Amazon for under $5. Even if they have minor scratches 95% of the time they're OK.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SP Wild View Post

I don't know how different the HD595 is to the HD598, but I felt the HD650 had a bigger out of head sensation than the HD595...the HD595 was leaner or "brighter" through the mids, but the HD650 had better treble extension and was much smoother, the 595 being noticeably more grained.

 

I used my K701 to analyse my amps and sources...it was more able to reveal differences due to its leaner signature and larger soundstage...but once again I felt the HD650 was the more resolute can - yet it didn't reveal amp and source differences as effectively as the K701...I feel the HD650 had the more tactile and agile transducer overall. 

 

I'm not so certain I can pick out the differences between 320 mp3 and lossless...if I could, I wouldn't care, because it wouldn't effect how I enjoy music via the HD650.  Also because of the LCD2s a good amp and dac, 320 mp3s have sounded better than 24/96 on the HD650 in the same setup.

 

I never realised how good 320 mps could sound until I heard then through the LCD2s...I no longer have issues with using mp3s....considering the economics of obtaining music and the info superhighway, I now have nearly as many downloaded mp3 albums as CD lossless rips.

 

I also found MP3s to benefit from the Secret Rabbit Code upsampling through earlier versions of foobar to restore some of the lost ambience.



 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Sennheiser HD650 Impressions Thread