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 315

post #4711 of 8809

In fact, while I'm on the topic of the TH-600, mind you I haven't heard the HD800 or T1 yet, but the TH600 had the deepest, most realistic, and most immersive and enjoyable soundstage I've ever heard. My new K712s seem like they might have a very slightly wider stage but the depth isn't there. I absolutely loved the soundstage on the TH-600, every one of my 'phones would be better if they had that kind of soundstage. I guess this is the downside to trying out really great gear, you realize what you're missing. But I still enjoy all of my cans as much as I ever did, I just have a better idea of what is possible and what I prefer. I can't wait to hear the HD800...

 

Anyway... back to the HD600's. ;)


Edited by devhen - 10/5/13 at 2:58pm
post #4712 of 8809
Quote:
Originally Posted by devhen View Post
 

Seriously though, if you don't think the HD600 has some graininess (along with every other dynamic headphone) just try them next to some Stax.

 

:biggrin: 

 

I noticed grain before I tried the Stax 407 and once I compared them side by side it was obvious that the grain i was hearing was indeed there. It was there in every dynamic headphone I have. The TH-600 I demoed seemed particularly grainy for such a high end 'phone. I'm not saying it didn't sound bloody great because it did. ;)

 

So it's a bit like comparing a TN panel to AMOLED?

post #4713 of 8809
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headzone View Post

 

So it's a bit like comparing a TN panel to AMOLED?

 

Sort of, yeah. Its kind of like the difference between a monitor where the pixels are physically large enough to see and a high-dpi one where individual pixels aren't noticeable. I guess you could call it resolution but I'm not sure if that's technically the proper term for it.

post #4714 of 8809

Maybe the grain is in the recording and the dynamic headphone is simply revealing it? Like the way a plasma TV will show movie grain but an LCD TV will smooth the grain over (make it look like a soap opera).

post #4715 of 8809
Quote:
Originally Posted by palmfish View Post
 

Maybe the grain is in the recording and the dynamic headphone is simply revealing it? Like the way a plasma TV will show movie grain but an LCD TV will smooth the grain over (make it look like a soap opera).

 

No way. The electrostats definitely revealed more. Well, it wasn't so much that it revealed more, although it did, but in particular it reproduced everything more accurately. The first thing I listened to was a live song; the echoes off of the walls of the venue had something to them that I had never heard with my dynamics. It absolutely blew my mind. It sounded exactly like I was there and in my dynamics it simply did not. There is an accuracy about electrostats that is hard to describe but is immediately apparent. My dynamics sounded like they were straining to reproduce the signal, basically "faking it", in comparison. The electrostats seemed to effortlessly just make the sound exist. There was no perception of an imperfect transducer attempting to reproduce the signal, the signal was just there, like a tiny version of the band was playing just outside your ears. The tonality and accuracy is worlds apart and I immediately got the impression that dynamic cone drivers are most likely incapable of ever quite pulling that off. The 'stats were in a different world. It was very eye opening and a tad depressing for all my beloved dynamic cans. But don't worry, a few days after I shipped the 407 back I came to love my dynamics again. ;) But I definitely plan on getting a Stax setup at some point. I really loved them. Every headphone hobbyist needs to hear them, it will open your eyes (or ears?) and reveal that the dynamics you assumed were basically reproducing the signal perfectly were never actually doing that.


Edited by devhen - 10/5/13 at 5:02pm
post #4716 of 8809

 

 

HD600 with good company :)

 

Ali

post #4717 of 8809
Quote:
Originally Posted by devhen View Post
 

 

No way. The electrostats definitely revealed more. Well, it wasn't so much that it revealed more, although it did, but in particular it reproduced everything more accurately. The first thing I listened to was a live song; the echoes off of the walls of the venue had something to them that I had never heard with my dynamics. It absolutely blew my mind. It sounded exactly like I was there and in my dynamics it simply did not. There is an accuracy about electrostats that is hard to describe but is immediately apparent. My dynamics sounded like they were straining to reproduce the signal, basically "faking it", in comparison. The electrostats seemed to effortlessly just make the sound exist. There was no perception of an imperfect transducer attempting to reproduce the signal, the signal was just there, like a tiny version of the band was playing just outside your ears. The tonality and accuracy is worlds apart and I immediately got the impression that dynamic cone drivers are most likely incapable of ever quite pulling that off. The 'stats were in a different world. It was very eye opening and a tad depressing for all my beloved dynamic cans. But don't worry, a few days after I shipped the 407 back I came to love my dynamics again. ;) But I definitely plan on getting a Stax setup at some point. I really loved them. Every headphone hobbyist needs to hear them, it will open your eyes (or ears?) and reveal that the dynamics you assumed were basically reproducing the signal perfectly were never actually doing that.

 

That's a fundamental difference between planar (magnetic or electrostatic) cans and dynamic cans - you are listening to sound produced by microns-thin membranes, vs rigid material.

post #4718 of 8809
Quote:
Originally Posted by jerg View Post

 

That's a fundamental difference between planar (magnetic or electrostatic) cans and dynamic cans - you are listening to sound produced by microns-thin membranes, vs rigid material.

 

That's interesting because I'm yet to hear a planar design and I assumed they would have some of the same characteristics as electrostats but then I hear people saying things like that the K712 is better than the HE-500 in every way and I think... if planars even have a portion of the accuracy and resolution of electrostats then that cannot be true. I'm very interested in trying out some planars to find out for myself. Would you say they share some of the electrostat's effortless qualities?

post #4719 of 8809
Quote:
Originally Posted by devhen View Post
 

 

That's interesting because I'm yet to hear a planar design and I assumed they would have some of the same characteristics as electrostats but then I hear people saying things like that the K712 is better than the HE-500 in every way and I think... if planars even have a portion of the accuracy and resolution of electrostats then that cannot be true. I'm very interested in trying out some planars to find out for myself. Would you say they share some of the electrostat's effortless qualities?

 

No no no, both electrostatic and planar magnetic headphones are "planar", as in both types of tranducers utilize a high-tension thin elastic membrane to produce soundwaves that are "planar"-shaped. So when I say planar in the above post, I meant both the magnetic type and the electrostatic type. Now obviously there are sweeping differences between those 2 but that's another story.

post #4720 of 8809
Quote:
Originally Posted by jerg View Post

 

No no no, both electrostatic and planar magnetic headphones are "planar", as in both types of tranducers utilize a high-tension thin elastic membrane to produce soundwaves that are "planar"-shaped. So when I say planar in the above post, I meant both the magnetic type and the electrostatic type. Now obviously there are sweeping differences between those 2 but that's another story.

 

Gotcha. Sorry about the confusion. When I said planar I meant planar magnetic such as the Hifimans and Audeze. I'm really interested in hearing them and I certainly hope they have some of the same amazing qualities the Stax electrostats have.

post #4721 of 8809
I have heard and owned electrostats, planar magnetic and dynamic headphones. The HD800s are still the best I've heard. The HE-6 come in second. I'd say it's less about the technology, and more about how it is implemented.

Best regards,
Adam
post #4722 of 8809

Yeah you're probably right. That's impressive though... man, I can't wait to hear me some HD800s. :)

post #4723 of 8809
I should also say that it depends on what you listen to. I don't need boomy bass, but I do need solid, substantial, weighty bass that goes fairly low. If you mostly listen to music heavy in the mids and treble, you might have different preferences.
post #4724 of 8809

^ Yep, preference and the genres you listen to play a big part. I would say that if you're someone who listens to orchestral type music and you're number one concern is having instruments sound exactly as they would if you were standing next to them, the Stax are absolutely the headphone for you. They are amazing in that sense but that doesn't mean I found them to be the "funnest" headphone for all of the various genres I listen to. ;) Though I did quite enjoy re-discovering all of my music through them.

post #4725 of 8809
Quote:
Originally Posted by amcananey View Post

I have heard and owned electrostats, planar magnetic and dynamic headphones. The HD800s are still the best I've heard. The HE-6 come in second. I'd say it's less about the technology, and more about how it is implemented.

Best regards,
Adam

 

HE500 is ~okay, fair sound quality, definitely not summit-fi level when stock. It took a lot of modifications to bring it to something that wows me.

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