Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Very brief impressions of all the headphones you've heard
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Very brief impressions of all the headphones you've heard - Page 8

post #106 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by sampson_smith View Post
My impressions on every can I've ever heard: surprisingly pretty good if not shockingly quite bad or somewhere in between.
Now there's a man who knows what he's talking about!

post #107 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man View Post
I understand what you are saying and maybe this thread is better for those who have some experience and knowledge as opposed to a beginners guide. If you look at the 'big picture' the Senns are not hated, many like them and no one can agree on how they sound, which suggests they are a bit of a jack of all trades. That is another way I could have described them.
Or...they have no strong sound of their own, which could explain the terms "boring" and "anaemic" and all the apparent contradictions. That relative colourlessness is in fact what I like about them: to me they don't interfere with the music nearly as much as most other phones. It's interesting that if you go back to the very introduction of the 595 you'll find the term "boring" popping up most often in threads about them. Few people had specific objections (except the term "grainy" which I fear I still don't understand), but many called them "boring". To me this suggests the writers were looking for a particular quality, or colour, in their phones, something that could get their blood rushing. The 595 doesn't do that, and its relative neutrality was what I loved about it from the first day I put it on my head (ah...memories!).

Of course choice of music plays a large part here.
post #108 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kernmac View Post
There are many reasons why people report conflicting or even totally contradictory descriptions of headphone characteristics, below are a few rationales. And I believe variation of opinion is due to several factors contributing at any one time.

The variation in the music we listen to.
The system/equipment that we use.
The reference that we use -headphone sound characteristics are relative to other headphones. That is to say that Headphone A may be bass centric in comparrison to Headphone B, but Headphone C is far bassier than Headphone A. Therefore A could be reported as having a lot of bass (in comparrison to Headphone B) or reported as being bass light (in comparrison to Headphone C).
The experience and ability of the listener to describe what they are hearing.
People who post other peoples opinion. The fact that some post opinions when they haven't even heard the headphone, but believe because they have read it, it must be so.
People report from memory and memory isn't very reliable when it comes to how things sound.
People report after hearing something for 5 minutes or from brief encounters in noisy distracting environments.
Hearing aclimatization- we become used to the sound, so the headphone no longer has that dominate trait, or lacks that aspect to such a degree
Fanboyism
Trolls
Shills
I agree with all of those, particularly choice of music and variations in expectation--ie, what we're used to. And yes, too many people read descriptions and imagine they've actually heard the phone in question--and even advise newbies on that basis ("I believe the 580 is the same as the 600 which is very similar to the 650, from what I've read. So yes, you'll probably find the 650 sounds like just a better version of your 555"). Bah humbug!

If I were to come to the Senn phones (from the 555 up) after listening to phones like the Beyer 880pro, any AT, any Grado, Denon 2000 or 5000, I would certainly consider them--initially--dull and lifeless...anaemic. This is perhaps why 5 minutes at a meet is not a good idea for judging. And if I were after a rock or rap or electronica phone, Senn would not be my first choice. So whenever reviewing, even in passing, it's a good idea to state musical preferences and how familiar one is with the phone--whether heard at a meet or a mate's place or lived with for years. Also state one's preference--bright, bassy, whatever.

This thread is somewhat exempt from the above as it's merely impressions.
post #109 of 114
I agree with the things you said pp312. Lots of people dont understand that switching from can to can will make the next one reveal what they dont have compared to the cans before them. At first a senn 595 might seem boring after a grado but do it the other way around and the grado will seem harsh and unlistenable. Its a trick. Its good if I were a salesman trying to sell a particular model to do those things. In that process of headphone swapping, your ears are calibrated/acclimated to the cans you just finished listening to instead of the sound of live instruments so it is not a valid way to assess a headphones performance. It is better if one knows these things before going to a meet
post #110 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by donunus View Post
In that process of headphone swapping, your ears are calibrated/acclimated to the cans you just finished listening to instead of the sound of live instruments so it is not a valid way to assess a headphones performance. It is better if one knows these things before going to a meet
I try to keep the memory of a live orchestra in my mind when assessing any headphone. I go as often as possible (though not often enough) to the Sydney Opera House to hear a live orchestra and that's my constant yardstick--and I can tell you that a live orchestra is nowhere near as bright as most of the phones people rave about here. Of course, most people here are not looking for that sound; they're looking for something that best presents their chosen music, or to approximate a situation like a pub gig or rock concert--a very different aim to mine. I can't really think of any other explanation for the fact that I find most of the favoured cans on HeadFi waaaay too bright and others find the Sennheisers boring and anaemic.
post #111 of 114
Im in the sennheiser love camp meeself
post #112 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by pp312 View Post
Or...they have no strong sound of their own, which could explain the terms "boring" and "anaemic" and all the apparent contradictions. That relative colourlessness is in fact what I like about them: to me they don't interfere with the music nearly as much as most other phones. It's interesting that if you go back to the very introduction of the 595 you'll find the term "boring" popping up most often in threads about them. Few people had specific objections (except the term "grainy" which I fear I still don't understand), but many called them "boring". To me this suggests the writers were looking for a particular quality, or colour, in their phones, something that could get their blood rushing. The 595 doesn't do that, and its relative neutrality was what I loved about it from the first day I put it on my head (ah...memories!).

Of course choice of music plays a large part here.
Very good points, so the HD595s are also very neutral as the reviews are probably more for the amp or even the music being listened to. I think neutral cans are often neglected at auditions in favour of the more coloured and dynamic. But neutral cans are more satisfying in the long run. I want to go back and listen to the HD595s again now.
post #113 of 114
"I want to go back and listen to the HD595s again now."

Looks like my work here is done. Time for Senn Man to move on.
post #114 of 114
SE110 - No personality, bass anemic, all around dismal sound quality, sturdy built quality, gigantic housing to the point only olives gave good isolation

RE0 - light, clarity, laid back, airy, balanced, crisp highs but not fatiguing, quite sensitive to tips

W3 - Energetic, colored, fun, reacts a lot to EQ (in a good way)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Very brief impressions of all the headphones you've heard