or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › HD800 vs HE500
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

HD800 vs HE500 - Page 65

post #961 of 1025
HD800s are some of the most consistent headphones out there. Try comparing to AKG or Beyerdynamic and you will be very surprised.
post #962 of 1025
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blasyrkh View Post
 

Hi guy, I recently bought a hd800 sn 28xxx because I wanted to hear the "new" version.

 

I don't know if someone remembers that I prefered the HE500, and what i wrote about these two cans.

 

actually, the new hd800 is totally different, not bright at all, no sibilance, and plenty of bass. WTF happened??

 

The HD800 has always had a quite a lot of bass actually. It's just that it's extremely tight and with absolutely zero "boominess".

 

I think the HD800 is one of those cans where the more experienced your ears get the better they sound, it might not be the HD800's that have changed but your ears that have learned to appriciate them. Just a thought. :rolleyes:

post #963 of 1025
Quote:
Originally Posted by dleblanc343 View Post
 


It's simple, it's called product variation. Nothing will come out of a factory identical to the microscope.

 

The difference between S.N 15000 and 25000 could be the same as between S.N 15001 and 15002.

 

Think what you want, but I actually took hours of my time to actually test out this variance in sound, because I felt that if I wanted a concrete answer, I'd have to do it myself.

 

Also, measurements require many factors such positioning of the headphone on the dummy-mic, the condition of the pads, etc.

 

As for what you hear, it's all mental, even if you don't think so. I had the opposite reaction when I upgraded to the HD800 from the HE500; the highs didn't bother me. But after trying the HE500 again, my take on the HD800 changed a bit; so I had to adjust things. You really need to A/B in this hobby. Audio memory is like a void, honestly.

It's likely a bit more of a function of measurement variation. Measuring frequencies higher than 4kHz is very difficult to do precisely and accurately.

post #964 of 1025
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacedonianHero View Post
 

It's likely a bit more of a function of measurement variation. Measuring frequencies higher than 4kHz is very difficult to do precisely and accurately.


That's very true

post #965 of 1025
Quote:
Originally Posted by dleblanc343 View Post
 


 

 

As for what you hear, it's all mental, even if you don't think so. I had the opposite reaction when I upgraded to the HD800 from the HE500; the highs didn't bother me. But after trying the HE500 again, my take on the HD800 changed a bit; so I had to adjust things. You really need to A/B in this hobby. Audio memory is like a void, honestly.

 

opposite reaction? opposite to which one? hd800 better than he500? or brighter?

 

just a question, do you hear any sibilance with the he500?

 

you seem to be so confident. what if I put it in another way,saying that your ears aren't trained/good enough to hear sibilance or harsh highs? or saying that you didn't listen to records where sibilance was much obvious so you were not able to hear any difference?


Edited by Blasyrkh - 3/17/14 at 6:34pm
post #966 of 1025
Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoEars View Post
 

 

The HD800 has always had a quite a lot of bass actually. It's just that it's extremely tight and with absolutely zero "boominess".

 

I think the HD800 is one of those cans where the more experienced your ears get the better they sound, it might not be the HD800's that have changed but your ears that have learned to appriciate them. Just a thought. :rolleyes:

 

sorry, but I will never learn to appreciate bright/sibilant signature :P

post #967 of 1025
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacedonianHero View Post
 

It's likely a bit more of a function of measurement variation. Measuring frequencies higher than 4kHz is very difficult to do precisely and accurately.

 

oooh come on!!!

would they ship the FR if they were all the same?!

post #968 of 1025
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blasyrkh View Post
 

 

oooh come on!!!

would they ship the FR if they were all the same?!

Are you familiar with gage R&R? All measurement devices introduce variability into the measurement system. There are typically 3 things that cause variability: 

 

1.) The variability of the product.

2.) The variability introduced by the person taking the measurement. 

3.) The variability of the gage used to take the measurement.

 

Ideally, #2 and #3 should account for less than 10% of the variability...but that's in an ideal situation.

 

Here's a link to an article I wrote on innerfidelity.com:

 

http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/expert-tests-innerfidelitys-headphone-measurement-repeatability-and-reproducibility

 

"Region 3 (1300Hz – 3400Hz) shows a shifting upwards of the variability. Once we approach about 3.4kHz the variability does really begin to become a strong function of headphone placement. The resulting 2x standard deviation is now 1.8dB. Again, this would mean, should we measure the same pair of HD800s 1000 times (and place the headphones on the head in between each measurement) we could expect 950 measurements would be within 1.8dB.

However, once we reach higher frequencies (>8.4kHz), the variability really begins to become strongly affected. The average standard deviation in this region is now almost 5dB. So yet again, variations of +/-5dB are to be expected in this region. The maximum variability is approximately 18dB, higher still. "

 

So it is very much a real thing based on the measurements we took on Tyll's setup. I gotta believe that similar issues are there for Sennheiser too. To what extent? Not sure, but it would be fun to find out.


Edited by MacedonianHero - 3/17/14 at 7:08pm
post #969 of 1025
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacedonianHero View Post
 

Are you familiar with gage R&R? All measurement devices introduce variability into the measurement system. There are typically 3 things that cause variability: 

 

1.) The variability of the product.

2.) The variability introduced by the person taking the measurement. 

3.) The variability of the gage used to take the measurement.

 

Ideally, #2 and #3 should account for less than 10% of the variability...but that's in an ideal situation.

 

Here's a link to an article I wrote on innerfidelity.com:

 

http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/expert-tests-innerfidelitys-headphone-measurement-repeatability-and-reproducibility

 

"Region 3 (1300Hz – 3400Hz) shows a shifting upwards of the variability. Once we approach about 3.4kHz the variability does really begin to become a strong function of headphone placement. The resulting 2x standard deviation is now 1.8dB. Again, this would mean, should we measure the same pair of HD800s 1000 times (and place the headphones on the head in between each measurement) we could expect 950 measurements would be within 1.8dB.

However, once we reach higher frequencies (>8.4kHz), the variability really begins to become strongly affected. The average standard deviation in this region is now almost 5dB. So yet again, variations of +/-5dB are to be expected in this region. The maximum variability is approximately 18dB, higher still. "

 

So it is very much a real thing based on the measurements we took on Tyll's setup. I gotta believe that similar issues are there for Sennheiser too. To what extent? Not sure, but it would be fun to find out.

i'm not saying you are telling ******** at all!

It's just that you don't know how  sennheiser takes those graphs, i think they are the best engineers and they know what they do.

 

furthermore, I think sennheiser graphs are taken differently, they are too smooth compared to tyll's or headroom's

post #970 of 1025
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blasyrkh View Post
 

i'm not saying you are telling ******** at all!

It's just that you don't know how  sennheiser takes those graphs, i think they are the best engineers and they know what they do.

 

furthermore, I think sennheiser graphs are taken differently, they are too smooth compared to tyll's or headroom's

 

I have no idea if their setup is better or worse. I'd like to see the data to make that assertion. All I'm trying to show is that measuring headphones (especially the upper frequencies) isn't black and white...there's a lot of grey. :smile:

post #971 of 1025
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blasyrkh View Post
 

 

opposite reaction? opposite to which one? hd800 better than he500? or brighter?

 

just a question, do you hear any sibilance with the he500?

 

you seem to be so confident. what if I put it in another way,saying that your ears aren't trained/good enough to hear sibilance or harsh highs? or saying that you didn't listen to records where sibilance was much obvious so you were not able to hear any difference?

Yes the HE500 do have sibilance in stock configuration. And yes the HD800 too of course. My ears are very decent, and I know a good recording from a bad one... I've really been critical on myself in this hobby, and am no afraid to say so.

 

In any case, both headphones are very good. Go with what's optimal for you...

post #972 of 1025
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacedonianHero View Post
 

 

I have no idea if their setup is better or worse. I'd like to see the data to make that assertion. All I'm trying to show is that measuring headphones (especially the upper frequencies) isn't black and white...there's a lot of grey. :smile:

 

why don't you ask Tyll to ask sennehiser some kind of interview about this matter?

post #973 of 1025
Quote:
Originally Posted by dleblanc343 View Post
 

Yes the HE500 do have sibilance in stock configuration. And yes the HD800 too of course. My ears are very decent, and I know a good recording from a bad one... I've really been critical on myself in this hobby, and am no afraid to say so.

 

In any case, both headphones are very good. Go with what's optimal for you...

 

eh500's sibilance more or less than hd800's?


Edited by Blasyrkh - 3/18/14 at 6:52am
post #974 of 1025
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blasyrkh View Post
 

 

eh500's sibilance more or less than hd800's?

If both driven properly with over 1000mw neither should have sibilance.

 

HD800's brightness can come off as sibilant, but it's in it's character, and the 500's are an overall darker signature,, focusing most of it's energy in the upper mid-range. The HD800 is about the entire spectrum but the treble extension is one of the immediate takeaways.

 

For the money they can be had for these days, the 500's are a fantastic buy. 

post #975 of 1025
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_Himself View Post

If both driven properly with over 1000mw neither should have sibilance.

HD800's brightness can come off as sibilant, but it's in it's character, and the 500's are an overall darker signature,, focusing most of it's energy in the upper mid-range. The HD800 is about the entire spectrum but the treble extension is one of the immediate takeaways.

For the money they can be had for these days, the 500's are a fantastic buy. 

Hd800 need less than 300mW ? Why do you think 1000?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: High-end Audio Forum
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › HD800 vs HE500