or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Sennheiser HD 600 Impressions Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sennheiser HD 600 Impressions Thread - Page 116

post #1726 of 17113

ohhh...man that sounds familiar....was that the one with the nude king thinking he was wearing like the best cloths. But he was just as happy as could be...i think that was it.

post #1727 of 17113
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecansmancan View Post

hey guys just another question i thought i throw in on this subject. This link also discredits vacuum tubes (amps i assume) as having better synergy with anything. He says solid states are superior in every way. thoughts comments?

 

It's an interesting question - but perhaps one that is oversimplified purely in his opening assumption .......

Quote:

"the claim that vacuum tubes are inherently superior to transistors in audio applications"

 

In my case - I recognise that solid state probably is superior - especially in measurements, life expectancy etc.  I also know that clever designers can tweak an SS amp to sound like a tube amp.  But most don't.  And I like the slightly euphonic sound that a nice tube amp gives to the mid-range.  I'm not an audiophile - and I do like a coloured sound that is pleasing to me.  Short of getting a designer to customise a SS amp to my tastes - the easier path is a good (value for money) tube amp - and the ability to roll tubes according to my tastes.  I have the Audio-gd NFB-12 and LD MKIV - and I do recognise both of them having a colouration (mid range warmth).  But it's why I bought them.  I really love the LD with my DT880 and K701.  I prefer the NFB-12 with my HD600 (it does sound mighty fine on the LD as well).

 

I personally don't want "wire with gain".  I've already worked out the particular sound that is most pleasing to my ears - and I wouldn't be without the LD.  The purist objectivists can definitely say that SS is superior.  But is it better? - and when you bring subjectivity to the fore ...... for me, I like (and use) both.  Better is what is most pleasing to me.

post #1728 of 17113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooko View Post

The purist objectivists can definitely say that SS is superior.  But is it better?

I can't think of any better way to put it than that my friends

post #1729 of 17113
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecansmancan View Post

exactly so then i wonder is it technically placebo effect, or simply personal preference. Like even on the note of guitar amps, i love the raw sound of those tube amps. Can distortion be a good thing in this case? I guess it all sorta comes back to personal preference. And to some extent i think even the placebo effect can be a good thing. For example, if you get that $$$$ cable and you honestly think it sounds better. ha well more power to you.

Nothing wrong with preferring tube 'coloration'. the problem comes if people are selling something that's not there, and preying upon people's gullibility, as in the case of expensive aftermarket cables. "a fool and his money are soon parted"


Edited by lejaz - 9/9/12 at 8:57pm
post #1730 of 17113

I consider myself pretty much an "objectivist" (I know, surprise, surprise eek.gif) and I don't see anything wrong with coloring sound to make it more pleasing to you. In fact, the reason why I prefer a vintage receiver for an amp is so I can use tone controls. I mean, almost every piece of music ever recorded was mixed and mastered by someone either listening on a pair of monitor loudspeakers or headphones and using their own opinion of what sounds good. Who's to say that you agree with them?

 

Then there are the recordings that were just poorly mastered. A lot of the early CD releases (that make up a large part of my collection) were originally analog mastered and simply transferred to digital without a thought of the different EQ required for CD playback vs. LP playback.

 

The only thing I'll say about tube amps (or SS amps of questionable quality/accuracy) is that it's a lot easier to get the sound you want with EQ than it is by experimenting with amps and tubes looking for that perfect "synergy" - a synergy that, if you are fortunate enough to find it, only exists with this one specific combination.

 

In my humble opinion, it makes more sense to have a "wire with gain" upstream as the permanent foundation for your system so all you have to worry about is using headphones that sound good to you. Headphones come and go, but at least your gear stays the same. I think the absence of tone controls for the sake of an "audiophile friendly cleaner signal path" is a total crock. A scam encouraged by the manufacturers to ensure a steady stream of sales to clients looking for a new or "better" sound.

 

Bottom line though, vacuum tubes are cool - in a nostalgic, old school sort of way. But like LP records, or a '68 Camaro, they don't perform well at all by modern standards. Their appeal is emotional because they have their charms and can be fun to own and play with. But just like someone who spends their hard-earned money on a '60's muscle car, hopefully they do so with eyes fully open about what they are getting. A '68 Camaro is a sight to behold (and hear at WOT), just don't try to race it against your grandma's Toyota Camry - you'll be breathing her ULEV exhaust fumes. biggrin.gif


Edited by palmfish - 9/9/12 at 9:02pm
post #1731 of 17113

Has anyone else yet tried adding a tiny square of adhesive Creatology foam to the back circle of the HD-600 driver yet? Can make it less sticky with your fingers.

I love the results. With the ODAC+Micro Amp (or E9) it's probably one of the most balanced sounding headphones i've heard. Stock..not so much, but close (IMO).

Basically the modded HD-600 sounds like an HD-580 on steroids with a larger soundstage. I've always found the 580 to sound clearer (and more detailed) than the 600, but now the 600 might have the edge.

I'm not really a huge fan of the HD-600, but do like the 580.

 

The modded HD-600 sounds much clearer and the (small) mid-bass hump is reduced a lot.

 

I imagine everyone loves the HD-600 as it is already, so there's no point..

 

BTW It's interesting how the reduced bass hump is fooling my brain into thinking the soundstage is larger.

 

I won't get into the cable debate, but I like making my own for fun. I heard a difference quite easily with the HRT MSII, but not so much on my ODAC.

I think it's all due to capacitance. If you don't believe in cables, try the HD-650 with a CANARE starquad cable biggrin.gif yuck. High capacitance wire is a complete fail (for me) on the HD-650.

 

I also hate the HD-650 cable on the HD-580/600. I tried that for a week and hated it.

 

Overall cables for me never made more than say a 3-5% difference. My 598 had the most benefit from a ($10) recable. I don't buy cables to change a headphones sound signature. That's silly.

My belief is that high capacitance wire sounds warmer than lower capacitance wire normal_smile%20.gif Why? No idea. Maybe this is why I hate silver plated copper on the Q701. Lower capacitance I'm guessing?

post #1732 of 17113

so...i come home from school. sit down and stick the hd600 on. Goodness was it hard to tear myself away for 30 seconds to print out a report...im not sure if its a good or bad thing that i have to know that i'll have time to listen to these babies. Simply because i know, i wont leave them in any short order...

post #1733 of 17113
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecansmancan View Post

exactly so then i wonder is it technically placebo effect, or simply personal preference. Like even on the note of guitar amps, i love the raw sound of those tube amps. Can distortion be a good thing in this case? I guess it all sorta comes back to personal preference. And to some extent i think even the placebo effect can be a good thing. For example, if you get that $$$$ cable and you honestly think it sounds better. ha well more power to you.


as long as you understand that you want the warm distorted sound of tubes and lamp-chord wiring, then that machine you're using to reproduce the music is the perfect machine for you. for, me, wanting a clear image -- like a photograph taken with canon L lenses instead of coke-bottle lenses -- then the jena cable is what i've heard sound the clearest on difficult recordings. typically, i can hear the lyrics on old recordings as actual words instead of the hidden content of singing voices, with better cable. if i were listening to an electric guitar, chet atkins maybe, i'd want only that sound, would listen to it on an old AM delco while on the road, and not care that much what exactly the jordonaires were saying, the background instruments that much: wouldn't need to hear exactly and simultaneously as counterpoint what the boys in the band were doing. but, if i were listening to wes montgomery in my head and at home, i'd want to hear everything each member of the quartet was saying about the song. it's a question of what kind of buzz you want: skin pop or head bend. my head gets bent by music: i've been f'd by music since i was 2.

 

for me, it's not a placebo effect, anymore than swapping from strings on tin cans to a telephone is placebo. it's pretty obvious, if you do the auditioning.

post #1734 of 17113
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikebauer View Post


as long as you understand that you want the warm distorted sound of tubes and lamp-chord wiring, then that machine you're using to reproduce the music is the perfect machine for you. for, me, wanting a clear image -- like a photograph taken with canon L lenses instead of coke-bottle lenses -- then the jena cable is what i've heard sound the clearest on difficult recordings. typically, i can hear the lyrics on old recordings as actual words instead of the hidden content of singing voices, with better cable. if i were listening to an electric guitar, chet atkins maybe, i'd want only that sound, would listen to it on an old AM delco while on the road, and not care that much what exactly the jordonaires were saying, the background instruments that much: wouldn't need to hear exactly and simultaneously as counterpoint what the boys in the band were doing. but, if i were listening to wes montgomery in my head and at home, i'd want to hear everything each member of the quartet was saying about the song. it's a question of what kind of buzz you want: skin pop or head bend. my head gets bent by music: i've been f'd by music since i was 2.

 

for me, it's not a placebo effect, anymore than swapping from strings on tin cans to a telephone is placebo. it's pretty obvious, if you do the auditioning.

Total condescending rubbish....imho....comparing a stock cables("lamp cord wiring") and plugs to taking a photo through 'coke bottle lenses'....you must be kidding. Didn't you know that the headphone that's the subject of this thread have been used in classical mastering studios? Well, FWIR, anyway... I haven't seen it with my own eyes. I never heard of any mastering engineer who felt that the stock plugs and cables were causing horrible mud and muck in their monitoring set ups. Perhaps some use after market cables....but I'm sure stock cables are good enough for most engineers....but not good enough for those who want 'pure sound', lol. As if pure sound exists in any recording.

post #1735 of 17113
Quote:
Originally Posted by tdockweiler View Post

 

 With the ODAC+Micro Amp (or E9) it's probably one of the most balanced sounding headphones i've heard.

I just sold my Q701s and am listening to the HD600s that got here 9 minutes ago lol with the e9/e7 combo.  I can't believe how tiny they are compared to AKGs!

post #1736 of 17113

I guess Ive got to get in on this one. I have tried many after market cables including those mentioned and I have Never found enough of a difference in the sound to jusitfy the expense.  

post #1737 of 17113
Quote:
Originally Posted by olddtfan View Post

I guess Ive got to get in on this one. I have tried many after market cables including those mentioned and I have Never found enough of a difference in the sound to jusitfy the expense.  

... and another joins the war. hahaha. olddtfan say he can tell the difference; mike over here says its like comparing a lamp cord to headphone cords (really bro, just a but exaggerated dotcha  think); we've got personal preferrnce getting attacked by "pure" music, what ever that is. And I'll be honest, its really really...funny popcorn.gif

post #1738 of 17113
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecansmancan View Post

... and another joins the war. hahaha. olddtfan say he can tell the difference; mike over here says its like comparing a lamp cord to headphone cords (really bro, just a but exaggerated dotcha  think); we've got personal preferrnce getting attacked by "pure" music, what ever that is. And I'll be honest, its really really...funny popcorn.gif

Agree....I think a lot of mikebrauer's comments are too funny to be honest perceptions.....likely he's just trolling to get a reaction out of people. There's lots of people who claim aftermarket cables can make a difference but his notion that a stock cable and plug and a tube amp are comparable to a camera with a coke bottle lens is too absurd.....especially since not a single person has measured this 'junk' that he claims the stock cables are adding to the 'pure sound' of the recording. Actually the lamp cord might make a usable audio cable. I think someone once compared a wire coat hanger to an expensive cable in an experiment and no one could tell the difference. I may be mistaken about that one....but somewhere in the back of my mind I recall reading something like that. .


Edited by lejaz - 9/10/12 at 5:16pm
post #1739 of 17113
Quote:
Originally Posted by lejaz View Post

Agree....I think a lot of mikebrauer's comments are too funny to be honest perceptions.....likely he's just trolling to get a reaction out of people. There's lots of people who claim aftermarket cables can make a difference but his notion that a stock cable and plug and a tube amp are comparable to a camera with a coke bottle lens is too absurd.....especially since not a single person has measured this 'junk' that he claims the stock cables are adding to the 'pure sound' of the recording. Actually the lamp cord might make a usable audio cable. I think someone once compared a wire coat hanger to an expensive cable in an experiment and no one could tell the difference. I may be mistaken about that one....but somewhere in the back of my mind I recall reading something like that. .

I think they mentioned something about that in the article i posted up here with the ten biggest lies in audio. I'd like to try that one out....just to say i did it. What could possibly go wrong...

post #1740 of 17113

Whatever the truth, a stock cable is certainly not giving the audio signal the 'coke bottle camera lens' effect....it's not even adding any measurable distortion. That guy is almost certainly a troll with his absurd comments. He claims to want to hear the 'pure sound' of his old 78 recordings, yet they were done with tube gear and cheap wire 'mucking up' the purity, lol! 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Sennheiser HD 600 Impressions Thread