or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › The (new) HD800 Impressions Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The (new) HD800 Impressions Thread - Page 414

post #6196 of 25190
Quote:
Originally Posted by macbob713 View Post


Yes, sorry for not being more specific. I listen to primarily cd's and SACD's from a Sony XA5400ES CD player, so a Dac isn't that important to me at this time.

I spent some quality time, over two days, with the hd800 + hdvd800 and hdva600 at the tokyo show recently.  Truly awesome.  Right up there with the Luxmans that I was scurrying back and forth between, trying to A-B.  The sennheiser`s source was 16bit modern vocal jazz out of an unseen CD player, in balanced mode with Senn`s new 4xlr cable, which is also very nice - very light xlr.  I wasn`t able to A/B the supposedly weak DAC in the hdvd800 with the 600, because of the single source for both amps.  The senn guy told me the amplification in the 600 and 800 are identical.  I would go for the 600.  

 

Of course, neither are as good as my Andix.  


Edited by Dopaminer - 11/9/13 at 9:16pm
post #6197 of 25190
Quote:
Originally Posted by macbob713 View Post


Yes, sorry for not being more specific. I listen to primarily cd's and SACD's from a Sony XA5400ES CD player, so a Dac isn't that important to me at this time.

it sounded great. The amp is also gorgeous when its in front of you. I was very impressed with it.  It should be easy enough to audition in a store somewhere near you. 

post #6198 of 25190
Quote:
Originally Posted by magiccabbage View Post
 

it sounded great. The amp is also gorgeous when its in front of you. 

 

 

+1 on the gorgeous.  Also, the volume knob turns a shaft running the depth of the amp, visible in a glass window.  I could sit there for hours just turning that thing.  .   .  

post #6199 of 25190
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattTCG View Post
 

After admiring the hd800 from afar for a very long time, I will finally get to hear them this coming week on loan. Very excited!! :biggrin:

I'm excited for you bro! Keep us informed. :popcorn:

post #6200 of 25190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dopaminer View Post
 

 

I`m questioning the validity of the term `timbre` to evaluate audio gear.  I`ve just read through a few dictionary definitions and wikipedia, and the following quote sums up my skepticism:

 

 Timbre is..."...the psychoacoustician's multidimensional waste-basket category for everything that cannot be labeled pitch or loudness."

 

It seems the term most acurately applies to human hearing`s ability to distinguish between sound sources that are producing the same quantitative sound, for example a trumpet and trombone playing the same notes, or two different pianos playing the same notes...   Also the abitliy to recognize and distinguish between human voices...   My understanding is that it does not represent a quality that itself can be said to be either good or bad, natural or unnatural.  

 

I may be wrong. 

 

Anyway I`m going back to listening to my HD800s.  I just love the fluxtion of these headphones.  Vastly superior to the fluxtion of any other headphone, IMO.  

 

d

Agreed, but for our purpose in the appreciation of SQ in reproduction terms, it can be used as a term that labels the sound of an instrument, eg, 'good timbre' or 'unrealistic timbre' It's a lot easier than saying... 'the instruments sound real' or 'the double bass doesn't sound right' :D 

post #6201 of 25190
Quote:
Originally Posted by LugBug1 View Post
 

Agreed, but for our purpose in the appreciation of SQ in reproduction terms, it can be used as a term that labels the sound of an instrument, eg, 'good timbre' or 'unrealistic timbre' It's a lot easier than saying... 'the instruments sound real' or 'the double bass doesn't sound right' :D 

I would say that "good timbre" is more specific description than 'real sound'. So I wouldn't say it is easier to say:-) Of course, 'real sound' requires more than just real timbre reproduction.

 

My initial question was however specifically about the timbre reproduction in HD800. As I said during my audition, HD800 seemed to 'give' instruments greyish timbre in comparison to other headphones I listened to (ED10, D7000, W5000). But I have been suggested here that the greyish timbre I've heard in HD800 was probably caused by using not a synergistic system/too low quality system with HD800. I believe it is possible and will try to make another audition of HD800 in a better system only if I get a chance.

post #6202 of 25190
Quote:
Originally Posted by korzena View Post
 

I would say that "good timbre" is more specific description than 'real sound'. So I wouldn't say it is easier to say:-) Of course, 'real sound' requires more than just real timbre reproduction.

 

My initial question was however specifically about the timbre reproduction in HD800. As I said during my audition, HD800 seemed to 'give' instruments greyish timbre in comparison to other headphones I listened to (ED10, D7000, W5000). But I have been suggested here that the greyish timbre I've heard in HD800 was probably caused by using not a synergistic system/too low quality system with HD800. I believe it is possible and will try to make another audition of HD800 in a better system only if I get a chance.

Yeah that has to be it. Some midprice hp amps that I've tried have been very dry sounding with HD800's. They really will let you know how your upstream gear sounds. I prefer vintage equipment these days because I prefer a warmer, fuller sound over dry/analytical. Dry/analytical amps are perfect for planar hp's such as the LCD2's. Every amp has its own sound, so its just a case of finding one that pleases you most. The HD800's are the only hp that I've heard that doesn't stamp its own character on the sound at all. It may emphasize certain aspects but it won't add any colour or take anything away. 

 

A warmer, fuller sound doesn't have to be expensive either. Here's what I'm using at the mo...

 

Arcam Black box dac (1989) with the famous early philips dac chip. It's warm and earthy and not without good detail. You don't get the same resolution as you do with the latest chips but ime too much resolution can be a little annoying with a headphone as transparent and sensitive as the hd800's. But that's just my subjective opinion.

 

Paired with a Pioneer a lowly SA508 that has a sweet balanced tone without any hardness. This set up would cost you less than $300 in the second hand market. It looks nice imo and sounds beautiful. 

 

post #6203 of 25190

^^ Looking great LugBug!!  Long live the vintage steel. I'm about to use my sx1080 to put the hd800 to the test. :wink:

post #6204 of 25190
Quote:
Originally Posted by LugBug1 View Post
 

Yeah that has to be it. Some midprice hp amps that I've tried have been very dry sounding with HD800's. They really will let you know how your upstream gear sounds. I prefer vintage equipment these days because I prefer a warmer, fuller sound over dry/analytical. Dry/analytical amps are perfect for planar hp's such as the LCD2's. Every amp has its own sound, so its just a case of finding one that pleases you most. The HD800's are the only hp that I've heard that doesn't stamp its own character on the sound at all. It may emphasize certain aspects but it won't add any colour or take anything away. 

 

A warmer, fuller sound doesn't have to be expensive either. Here's what I'm using at the mo...

 

Arcam Black box dac (1989) with the famous early philips dac chip. It's warm and earthy and not without good detail. You don't get the same resolution as you do with the latest chips but ime too much resolution can be a little annoying with a headphone as transparent and sensitive as the hd800's. But that's just my subjective opinion.

 

Paired with a Pioneer a lowly SA508 that has a sweet balanced tone without any hardness. This set up would cost you less than $300 in the second hand market. It looks nice imo and sounds beautiful. 

 

I recently heard the arcam and the nad m51 side by side. I expected to hear a world of difference between the 2 considering that one costs 2000+. I spent around 3 hours with the 2 of them. I was surprised to find the differences were really subtle. The nad was smoother and that was about it. I was using the hd800 of course and the HDVD600 and Wa2. 

 

I think im happy enough with the arcam. I dont fancy paying an extra 1500 for a bit more smoothness. 

post #6205 of 25190
Quote:
Originally Posted by magiccabbage View Post
 

I think im happy enough with the arcam. I dont fancy paying an extra 1500 for a bit more smoothness. 

:eek: Sacrilege!! Get that wallet out and reach for that last 5%!!  :evil:

post #6206 of 25190
Quote:
Originally Posted by longbowbbs View Post
 

:eek: Sacrilege!! Get that wallet out and reach for that last 5%!!  :evil:

I think im gonna go for a Glenn OTL first then maybe ill do up the DAC. Maybe. 

post #6207 of 25190
Quote:
Originally Posted by longbowbbs View Post
 

:eek: Sacrilege!!

 

rolf, this was so sincere from you

 

and of course, we need to be all together in this, no backing off

post #6208 of 25190

It's a shame. This thread should immediately be downgraded to "normal-fi" section. :D

post #6209 of 25190
Quote:
Originally Posted by magiccabbage View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by longbowbbs View Post
 

:eek: Sacrilege!! Get that wallet out and reach for that last 5%!!  :evil:

I think im gonna go for a Glenn OTL first then maybe ill do up the DAC. Maybe. 

The amp is a bigger deal. Now to decide on a Glenn OTL or 300B!

post #6210 of 25190
Quote:
Originally Posted by roskodan View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by longbowbbs View Post
 

:eek: Sacrilege!!

 

rolf, this was so sincere from you

 

and of course, we need to be all together in this, no backing off

I resemble that!  

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 › The (new) HD800 Impressions Thread