Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Can the HD650 do bass like closed headphones?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Can the HD650 do bass like closed headphones? - Page 3  

post #31 of 81

Do the ultrasone 2400 sound sharp or sibilant at all?

post #32 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicholars View Post

Do the ultrasone 2400 sound sharp or sibilant at all?

Sibilance is almost always part of the recording IME, and tends to be exaggerated by bright (and especially "sharp") or analytical headphones. For example the PRO2900 + bad recordings = horrible; but with clean and well done recordings, they sound very good. They're still "sharp" though - as I've said in the past: they will drive nails on demand. Sometimes that's exactly what I want, and other times it isn't (and that's why I like having more than one headphone).

The HFI-2400, by contrast, aren't like that - they're much softer sounding overall. They're relatively dark too - I actually quite enjoyed them with grunge and nu metal (not that I generally listen to either of those genres, which kind of defeated the purpose of having a headphone that masters them...at least to me); which is not a great experience with the 2900 on most days (sometimes I can get into that level of aggression, but usually not). No, they aren't as smooth as the big Sennheisers, but very few headphones are. They will do fine with a wide range of music, as well as games and movies, and aside from the 2900, are among the bassiest headphones I've heard overall (it's absolutely uncanny when you consider that they're open (or semi-open I guess - most of their rear enclosure is still solid; they don't isolate for anything though)). But again, as Ultrasones, they tend not to push that into everything else. The 2400 are less refined in this regard (so there's comparatively more "bleeding" than with the 2900); it's basically a trade-off. You can either have outstanding speed and control, at the expense of forgiveness, or you can have forgiving and clean, at the expense of tightness.

As far as sound-staging goes, S-LOGIC Plus is an improvement - exactly as claimed by Ultrasone - IME. But even original S-LOGIC is still good compared to many headphones.
post #33 of 81

I would guess that the open 2400 have better soundstage than the closed ultrasones as well?

post #34 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicholars View Post

I would guess that the open 2400 have better soundstage than the closed ultrasones as well?

No idea, the last closed Ultrasone I tried was HFI-700 or some variant thereof (and that was in probably 2006). I would assume so as well (but S-LOGIC should mean they're still "ahead" of a lot of other headphones - I would guess), but really can't say with any certainty. I know that Ultrasone has revised/tweaked S-LOGIC more times for their closed headphones than for their open headphones (there's at least three variations afaik) - so that probably also needs to be considered as well (in other words, I don't even know if what I barely remember is even reflective of what you can go buy at Amazon right now).
post #35 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by obobskivich View Post

Ultrasone HFI-2400 and/or PRO2900.

That said, either of those, or the HD 650, will probably sound "less bassy" than the M50 because the M50 is a fairly boomy (this is not a positive trait) headphone. Basically all three of them will produce less distortion and "womp" in the low end, and that tightness will also make them less overwhelming - they're all very good though. Just something to keep in mind.
More of it and it goes lower. They sound like the ticket for what you want. They have a very solid low-end (and it extends well), but in true Ultrasone fashion will not overwhelm everything with bass unless the material starts out that way. They're also fairly dark and laid-back, not too dissimilar from the HD 650 (they have a completely different soundstage though, owing to S-LOGIC). They will compare favorably to many closed headphones in terms of low-end impact, and are superior to the M50 in about every way I can think of (I really don't like the M50 though, if you couldn't tell tongue.gif). Better soundstage, less congested, less boomy, less harsh, etc. They'll probably be a bit of a challenge for portable devices though (they're something like 70-80R - they're sensitive and all that, they're just a little high on the impedance side for some portables; basically any desktop component or anything sold as a "headphone amplifier" should have no problem though).
What? blink.gif

The PRO2900 are bassier than many closed headphones...but that isn't what we're talking about here, we're talking about the HFI-2400. Which are a different beast. They're looser, wetter, and darker than the 2900 - they lack the speed and precision of the PROline model. They also stage differently (different baffle design). On the upside they're much more forgiving and easier to live with, and probably appeal to a wider range of listeners (which, I suspect, is why Ultrasone markets them as hi-fi, while the PROline are marketed to pro users redface.gif).

Dunno what closed headphones you were using, but the Pro 2900 was clearly lagging behind basically every single closed headphone I have used, in terms of bass. Im not talking about refinement or precision, but immersion and presence. The bass was incredibly quick to decay, so it wasn't as fun as most closed headphones which highlight bass quite a bit.

I thought the Pro 2900 was overrpriced at it's price point, and should have been better off in the $200 range. I was comparing it directly with the Q701, and some songs had more bass on the AKGs. The Pro 2900 has the best bass textuire and articulation I have ever heard. I just wish it had more presence. The treble really ruined it for me, and made the mids recessed to a fault.
Edited by Mad Lust Envy - 1/13/13 at 2:35pm
post #36 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by obobskivich View Post


More of it and it goes lower. They sound like the ticket for what you want. They have a very solid low-end (and it extends well), but in true Ultrasone fashion will not overwhelm everything with bass unless the material starts out that way. They're also fairly dark and laid-back, not too dissimilar from the HD 650 (they have a completely different soundstage though, owing to S-LOGIC). They will compare favorably to many closed headphones in terms of low-end impact, and are superior to the M50 in about every way I can think of (I really don't like the M50 though, if you couldn't tell tongue.gif). Better soundstage, less congested, less boomy, less harsh, etc. They'll probably be a bit of a challenge for portable devices though (they're something like 70-80R - they're sensitive and all that, they're just a little high on the impedance side for some portables; basically any desktop component or anything sold as a "headphone amplifier" should have no problem though).
What? blink.gif

 

I completely agree with Obobskivich.  I did A/B comparison between my HFI-2400 and a HD650 during long minutes listening to Bach . Bigger and lower bass with more impact ( I could hear more distinctely double bass for example)  for the HFI-2400 . A bit more treble too but never harsh ( we listened to harpsichord too ) . As malveaux said the best point of HD650 is its mids and a very homogeneous way to present the Music (In my opinion). We had a very very Good Fostex CD player to power both the Senn and the Ultrasone and I really think they were both well powered.

 

HFI-2400 is far better than M50 IMO. Bass are far more textured and less boomy, overall sound is far better . but I didn't like M50 too. biggrin.gif . M50 is as overrated than HFI-2400 is unappreciated I think.  I sold ( traded ) my HFI-2400 recently (another Ultrasone is my new favorite headphone so the HFI-2400 should go frown.gif) and the guy who purchase it seems to be very happy while he owns (or owned) other very good headphones too.


Edited by Sorrodje - 1/13/13 at 2:32pm
post #37 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Lust Envy View Post

Dunno what closed headphones you were using, but the Pro 2900 was clearly lagging behind basically every single closed headphone I have used, in terms of bass. Im not talking about refinement or precision, but immersion and presence. The bass was incredibly quick to decay, so it wasn't as fun as most closed headphones which highlight bass quite a bit.

I thought the Pro 2900 was overrpriced at it's price point, and should have been better off in the $200 range. I was comparing it directly with the Q701, and some songs had more bass on the AKGs. The Pro 2900 has the best bass textuire and articulation I have ever heard. I just wish it had more presence. The treble really ruined it for me, and made the mids recessed to a fault.

I don't even know how to respond, except that I have no idea what headphones you're describing or what you're listening to. At all. Literally this could not be a less accurate description of the 2900 or the 701 - seriously I don't even know where to start.

I also *loathe* the "let's reprice the world" game.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorrodje View Post

I completely agree with Obobskivich.  I did A/B comparison between my HFI-2400 and a HD650 during long minutes listening to Bach . Bigger and lower bass with more impact ( I could hear more distinctely double bass for example)  for the HFI-2400 . A bit more treble too but never harsh ( we listened to harpsichord too ) . As malveaux said the best point of HD650 is its mids and a very homogeneous way to present the Music (In my opinion). We had a very very Good Fostex CD player to power both the Senn and the Ultrasone and I really think they were both well powered.

HFI-2400 is far better than M50 IMO. Bass are far more textured and less boomy, overall sound is far better . but I didn't like M50 too. biggrin.gif . M50 is as overrated than HFI-2400 is unappreciated I think.  I sold ( traded ) my HFI-2400 recently (another Ultrasone is my new favorite headphone so the HFI-2400 should go frown.gif ) and the guy who purchase it seems to be very happy while he owns (or owned) other very good headphones too.


beerchug.gif
Edited by obobskivich - 1/13/13 at 4:31pm
post #38 of 81
Apparently a very wild variation from what you heard. All I know is that the one I heard:

Bass is incredibly textured and refined, but not what I'd say is strong, and a far cry from the Pro 900's in terms of impact and presence. The bass was what I'd say neutral in that it won't add anymore than what is there.
Mids were clear but recessed due to the strong treble
Treble was quite metallic, and artficial sounding
Soundstage was about as big as the Pro 900, making the Pro 2900 not seem open at all.
Edited by Mad Lust Envy - 1/13/13 at 4:37pm
post #39 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Lust Envy View Post

Apparently a very wild variation from what you heard. ALl I know is that the one I heard:

Bass is incredibly textured and refined, but not what I'd say is strong
Mids were clear but recessed due to the strong treble
Treble was quite metallic, and artficial sounding
Soundstage was about as big as the Pro 900, making the Pro 2900 not seem open at all.

The PRO2900 has more bass on tap than the big-boy Senns, the Kenwood K1000 (which themselves outdo the Denon D2000), the AT ESW9, and so on. It's very impressive for an open headphone with velour pads. But remember - they won't "inject" it into material, so if you're listening to thin recordings, you'll get thin back. The mids are not really recessed, though the treble *is* prominent; unforgiving, but clear and clean (I would not say metallic at all) - they still have a coldness and the un-natural "S-LOGIC-ey" sound that all Ultrasones take on.

I haven't heard the PRO900, but the 2900 are better than the Sennheisers for staging, not as artificially wide/big as the 701 though. S-LOGIC will certainly respond to recording's stage size (it really depends on what you're listening to as to how big the stage is; only the 701 artificially stretch everything out over a few football fields) - big, spacious presentations (or movies) will tend to reflect that with S-LOGIC equipped 'phones, but more intimate settings are also translated as well. It's a nice effect imho (and yes I understand that it doesn't "work" for everyone). Ultrasone's in-house research on S-LOGIC can potentially explain your complaints with the mids and treble (basically if your ears are the wrong shape for S-LOGIC, headphones with S-LOGIC sound over-bright and harsh, and I can imagine headphones that are voiced bright and also have S-LOGIC in that situation would sound abominable), but I've never heard someone describe them as "bass light" - I mean there's some bassheads out there, but based on this I don't think there's a headphone made that's bassy enough to satisfy what you're describing. Maybe the Beats Pro or XB1000 with a ton of EQ on the bottom end could get there though. basshead.gif


But this is all the 2900 - I still haven't figured out how this relates to the 2400 being discussed...
post #40 of 81
They're not bass light. What I meant was that they don't have bass that would rival most closed headphones in terms of presence and impact. I'd say the bass is neutral.

As for the Q701 having more bass, only on certain songs. Pretty sure it's just a higher hump somwhere in the frequency. The Pro 2900 did have more bass overall.

And yes, I do believe I wasn't right for S-Logic, as it just makes everything worse.

I mentioned the Pro 2900, due to OP wanting an open headphone with bass like closed, and I needed to mention that even though the Pro 2900 shares a lot with the Pro 900 (known for it's bass), it's different in that aspect.

To OP:

Again, the best candidates I've heard are the DT990 250ohm (especially the Pro), and the HE-400, assuming you have a subtle bass boost, though for the most part, it won't need it.
Edited by Mad Lust Envy - 1/13/13 at 4:51pm
post #41 of 81
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by obobskivich View Post


Sibilance is almost always part of the recording IME, and tends to be exaggerated by bright (and especially "sharp") or analytical headphones. For example the PRO2900 + bad recordings = horrible; but with clean and well done recordings, they sound very good. They're still "sharp" though - as I've said in the past: they will drive nails on demand. Sometimes that's exactly what I want, and other times it isn't (and that's why I like having more than one headphone).

The HFI-2400, by contrast, aren't like that - they're much softer sounding overall. They're relatively dark too - I actually quite enjoyed them with grunge and nu metal (not that I generally listen to either of those genres, which kind of defeated the purpose of having a headphone that masters them...at least to me); which is not a great experience with the 2900 on most days (sometimes I can get into that level of aggression, but usually not). No, they aren't as smooth as the big Sennheisers, but very few headphones are. They will do fine with a wide range of music, as well as games and movies, and aside from the 2900, are among the bassiest headphones I've heard overall (it's absolutely uncanny when you consider that they're open (or semi-open I guess - most of their rear enclosure is still solid; they don't isolate for anything though)). But again, as Ultrasones, they tend not to push that into everything else. The 2400 are less refined in this regard (so there's comparatively more "bleeding" than with the 2900); it's basically a trade-off. You can either have outstanding speed and control, at the expense of forgiveness, or you can have forgiving and clean, at the expense of tightness.

As far as sound-staging goes, S-LOGIC Plus is an improvement - exactly as claimed by Ultrasone - IME. But even original S-LOGIC is still good compared to many headphones.

 

Thanks a lot for your opinion, and I was already interested in the HFI 2400, and I'm definitely going to look into them now. In the UK they're a good £200 - £250 cheaper than the Pro 2900.

 

I'm interested to know what you mean by referring to the HD650's as having a 'smooth' sound? I've also heard words such as 'lush' and 'colorful' being applied to it - particularly with reference to its midrange. But then I've also heard it being described as 'grainy', which to me, sounds the opposite of 'smooth'?

post #42 of 81

No the HD650 are definately not grainy sounding. Slightly boring and lacking in sub bass but other than that they sound very good.

post #43 of 81

I have always felt the treble was grainy on the HD650's.

The smoothness of their sound comes more from lack of hf's rather than the quality of it's hf's.

post #44 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by nigeljames View Post

I have always felt the treble was grainy on the HD650's.

The smoothness of their sound comes more from lack of hf's rather than the quality of it's hf's.

 

But look at your headphone inventory lol...

 

Maybe compared to all those uber high end headphones they sound grainy but compared to any headphones I have heard they don't. Certainly I have heard a LOT worse than HD650 for grainyness.... I would not describe them as grainy compared to similar priced headphones


Edited by nicholars - 1/14/13 at 5:32am
post #45 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicholars View Post

 

But look at your headphone inventory lol...

 

Maybe compared to all those uber high end headphones they sound grainy but compared to any headphones I have heard they don't. Certainly I have heard a LOT worse than HD650 for grainyness.... I would not describe them as grainy compared to similar priced headphones

 

Actually when I had the HD650's the other headphones I owned were K701's and Ultrasone ALO-780's.

 

The 780's had the best hf's, the K701's had the most (in fact they were slightly too bright and caused a ringing sound in my ears for sometime afterwords) but they were only harsh if the recording was.

 

The HD650's had very little hf's, a combination of being rolled off and recessed, so the quality of their treble was never a problem due to lack of quantity.

 

I am not saying the HD650's hf quality was any worse than other phones in it's price range but considering the ALO-780's cost $600 compared to $250 - $300 for the HD650's the difference in treble quality was very clear to me..


Edited by nigeljames - 1/14/13 at 6:50am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
This thread is locked  
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Can the HD650 do bass like closed headphones?