That could also be a compliment to the 700 since I'd probably take the 598s over a lot of other more expensive headphones too, even some stuff more expensive than the 700s.
That could also be a compliment to the 700 since I'd probably take the 598s over a lot of other more expensive headphones too, even some stuff more expensive than the 700s.
So this discussion has me interested; is there any consensus on which headphone(s) is recommended for a smooth, natural, non-fatiguing, non-damaging presentation while offering excellent clarity/detail?
I'm listening to some DT-880 600ohm Beyers for a couple of hours now. And
when I read your post "smooth, natural, and non-fatiguing" I had to post back....
These DT-880's for sure....
I just got them over the weekend and they are all those. Very good headphones
IMHO.
The closest to a consensus there would probably be the Sennheiser HD650. Though agreement is often illusive in this hobby.
I'd also add the HiFiMan HE-400. Also to a lesser extent the SRH1840, though some might disagree with me.
I agree the HD-650 are all of those things. Having owned them I did enjoy
them a lot. But a little too much bass for my tastes.

I'd call the conclusion that everything is good relatively ignorant and blindly optomistic.
I have never upgraded or felt the need to upgrade my speakers. I paid 800 dollars for a pair of quality powered monitors 8 years ago and have not felt the need for anything more since. In that time I have tried to find a pair of headphones that will reach a similar level of performance to my monitors and it has been very frustrating. I believe headphones should perform better than they do. I'm not pessimistic about anything. I am realistic about the current state of headphone-dome, and idealistic about the potential that has not been reached.
My assessment of headphones comes from my vision of what they could and should sound like. If you think that's pessimistic than we have different definitions of the word.
Heh. What is it you dislike about 100% of the array of available headphones. IMO a good number of them perform well above most loudspeakers (passive, not active monitors), in all aspects but the elusive spatialization and staging. Open backs, specifically of course.

I haven't heard those HiFiMans but if we're talking about Senn's line up I'd put the HD700s on par with the HD598s but trading Senn's trademark naturalness and smoothness for the usual audiophile faked "clarity". The only problem is they cost 4x as much as the 598s...
Ouch. Really, just, ouch. It's not every day Sennheiser disappoints me. HD700 hurts.
If I wanted fake clarity I'd buy Beyer.
I agree with you on both counts (you must be shocked!
). Any time I hear non-fatiguing, smooth, natural HD650 is the first thing in my mind. I'm also a big HE-400 fan. It can be more fatiguing than HD650 (anything would be), but it's still pretty tame, and is more dynamic than HD650 at the cost of some of HD650's legendary organic sound.
Too much bass? HD650 doesn't have great bass extension. It does have that midbass hump, but that's easily tamed. HD600 forgoes that hump but could be more fatiguing in the treble, though it's still more laid back than some. Also depends on amp/tubes.
Interesting. As a 650 & HE-400 fan, I'm not sure I'd get the same joy out of HE-300, but you have me curious now.
Just wondering if anyone knows where the serial number is stamed on the HD700.. can't seem to find it.
HD650
x2
I didn't know that Beyer got this reputation. Is that a problem with the Beyer T1 too ?
IMO it does.
I personally do not find the HD700 sounds very much like the T1. The HD700 is much more aggressive to my ears.
HD700 = T1 * T1
There are headphones with more absolute resolution than my speakers, but that's not my top priority and despite the fact that it's all people here seem to care about, is not the only aspect of fidelity. Almost all headphones are plagued by resonance problems from moderate to severe as well as incoherent FR, uneven FR, bright or bassy and just generally very colored. My speakers have no significant resonance of any kind, and are totally flat. When you listen to them, they disappear and you are just listening to music. Headphones do not do that because of these glaring problems.
Even super cheap M-Audio powered monitors are flatter than almost all headphones. Are they high resolution? No, but they have enough detail to convey music properly. High Res is a luxury and is nice but not necessary. I consider having flat FR and lack of serious resonance a requirement to uphold the integrity of music.
There may be other factors at play too, but I don't care about soundstage, so that's not a factor here.

There are headphones with more absolute resolution than my speakers, but that's not my top priority and despite the fact that it's all people here seem to care about, is not the only aspect of fidelity. Almost all headphones are plagued by resonance problems from moderate to severe as well as incoherent FR, uneven FR, bright or bassy and just generally very colored. My speakers have no significant resonance of any kind, and are totally flat. When you listen to them, they disappear and you are just listening to music. Headphones do not do that because of these glaring problems.
One problem is that most music are mastered for speakers and not headphone. You have can for instance 100% separation between let and right.
A crossfeed you help, but it muddies up the sound.