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 634

post #9496 of 24367

At the end of the day, subjective enjoyment is clearly what matters most, but I disagree with the characterization that measurements are "general info at best."

 

If you search back to the original hd800 appreciation thread (yup - some of us have been having this same conversation for that many years!), there was a discussion involving a Sennheiser rep regarding the patented plastic that Sennheiser developed for the hd800 cups, to go along with the ring drivers, with the specific intent of eliminating resonances and ringing.  In response to critical questions over the choice to use plastic in a flagship product, Sennheiser emphasized that this was the best available material and criticized manufacturers of wood cups, for example, for selecting a material that looked pretty but was very prone to resonance issues.

 

Given the context, I find it fascinating and awesome that members (and former members) of this community went on to measure and identify minor resonance issues, presumably due to the mesh rather than the plastic, as a likely cause of the lone aberration in the hd800's FR curve.  Moreover, based on these findings, they developed, tested and ultimately published a clever solution to this issue in the form of a totally reversible mod, using cheap and widely available foam and felt which, for the most part, preserves the pleasing aspects of the hd800's sonics.

 

Whether you ultimately prefer the modded hd800 or not (and recall that I personally reverted to stock, but only ever tried the 1.0 mod), these guys deserve serious recognition and a tip of the hat for their time and efforts at raising the bar - both sonically and in terms of fostering increased community understanding regarding why we are all hearing what we are hearing.   

post #9497 of 24367

I'm glad that I'm such a good rhymer
Better than being a social climber
Just because I'm a bit brighter
Than some f***ing writer

 

*purrs*


Edited by BournePerfect - 3/25/14 at 10:55am
post #9498 of 24367
Maybe my statement was insulting
So I take back my intent if that was indicated.
But my reasoning for the start stands on the fact it is done
Under what circumstance. Not saying there are not some really clever people here
And I am not one of them. But I simply feel mods
And offerings of what they will do are just
Fair to committing as facts. Many people here go crazy trying
Make there investment sound it's best and mods as good as some are
Do not represent the design intension.
So mod on its fun but better DAC or amps
Will get you much further into euphoric
Musicality

As for sennheiser and making there own plastic
For audio purposes that statement alone should say leave it alone
Al
post #9499 of 24367
Now ur a rap Starr Lmao

Can someone post a link to the mod 2 that is being posted here
Al
post #9500 of 24367
I need to start posting in haikus.
post #9501 of 24367

For better or worse, head-fi has a policy against direct links to certain other sites, but if you google "anax mod 2.0" it should be the first link.  

post #9502 of 24367

Al I am not saying I don't appreciate the engineering that has gone into the HD800.  I think it is quite remarkable.  However I will say that I am able to form my own opinion on the other design merits and limitations of the HD800 
 

We are really talking about semantics here.  If you want to put your faith in a manufacturer to produce a perfect product then kudos to you.  However I do think it is funny that the OR5 I have seen you mention is essentially just a modified OEM hiface.  M2Tech is a much bigger company then Emprirical Audio, yet Steve has managed to squeeze an unbelievable amount of performance out of what is basically an obsolete technology.

post #9503 of 24367
No hands down you have made your point. I ahve to agree with your view. Maybe in general I am not into modes so maybe some prejudice is involved on my behalf and that is never a good way to judge.

And that offramp is a must have to try. So I loose .lol

Al
post #9504 of 24367

To be honest I am not a big fan of modding either, however the "mod" is more along the lines of acoustic tuning of the ear cups.

 

Unfortunately no links are available.  Just find Purrin's fan club and you will be able get more information

post #9505 of 24367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stapsy View Post
 

Unfortunately no links are available.  

 

:blink:

 

http://www.head-fi.org/t/577530/hd800-anaxilus-mod

post #9506 of 24367

^way outdated.  Anax got banned, and the discussion of successive iterations of the mod now occur elsewhere.

post #9507 of 24367

In regards to the "diffuse imaging" issue of the HD800, no one is making this up or creating an issue which doesn't exist. I think Staps pretty much summed it up, but I will explain more. And no I'm not that stupid or deaf as to hook up the HD800 out phase. Please read carefully.

 

The diffuse imaging issue has been mentioned by other people in the past. It's not anything new. The effect I am describing is not any different from having a flat screen TV smack the the middle of your speakers or having open baffle speakers located too close to the wall where we get some early reflections which muck up the imaging or create an overly diffuse sound. Let's think about the HD800 design. It's basically a driver suspended in air with a cage and the mesh screen. Unfortunately, the mesh screen isn't totally acoustically transparent, which means it acts similarly (but not nearly as bad) as the TV flat screen or wall in the aforementioned examples.

 

As Staps said, covering the mesh with rug or shelf liner, which absorbs these early reflections better, also results in a narrowing of the stereo image. Some people like this. Some people don't. IMO, it does help with more precise location of instruments. And I do prefer it because the stage width is set more realistically rather than being unrealistically super wide.

 

Now in terms of the 6kHz peak which adds that bit of hardness or sometimes glare to the treble, I believe Arnaud did some cup simulations of the HD800 a few years ago which confirmed this behavior. At that point, I was unsure if the cup was the primary culprit, i.e., I still felt the driver may have had something to do with it. A few years later, Anax and I masked out the effect of the cup and took a few measurements. I am now totally convinced the 6kHz peak is caused by the cup design. (Which means Sennheiser really did something amazing with the HD800 driver.) Although I have to say the HD800 is still bright.

post #9508 of 24367
That's is a very good expLanation. Thanks.

As for the brightness. The little I can tell is you cannot have great detail and staging and it not having a brighter presentation. As the LCD 3 is not nearly as bright but truly lacks all the staging and details of the hd800. And the HE6 is in the middle between them. Pick your potion or poison.

Al
post #9509 of 24367

or the question is how flat is the measuring equipments?  Does anyone ever wonder about that?  I do all the times.  

I spent a little too much $ on condenser mic for recording back in the days.  That's why I have to ask the question. :D


Edited by koiloco - 3/25/14 at 3:33pm
post #9510 of 24367
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALRAINBOW View Post

As for the brightness. The little I can tell is you cannot have great detail and staging and it not having a brighter presentation. As the LCD 3 is not nearly as bright but truly lacks all the staging and details of the hd800. And the HE6 is in the middle between them.

 

I believe there is a middle ground. The LCD-3 is just way too laid back. The HE-6 is indeed somewhere in between, but it does have some issues with "etch". The HE-6 is fast sounding, but like most other orthos, not very resolving. The LCD-3, if you can hear past its laid back nature, is actually more resolving than the HE-6. The HFM's take a brute force approach with big magnets and coarse traces on the diaphragm. The Audezes have very fine traces on the diaphragm which results in better efficiency and better ability to reproduce micro details.

 

Dynamic driver technology tends to be more resolving than planar. It's really just a matter of Sennheiser making a headphone with the HD800's resolving capabilities which isn't as bright. The Anax modded HD800 or HD800 with EQ sound just as resolving to me, but without pain when used with rock or popular music recordings. The reason classical or natural instrument recordings tends to be fine with the HD800 is that they are much more bandwidth limited. One can even argue that the HD800s brightness works in favor of recordings which are bandwidth limited in the treble.

 

Moar treble is like bad photoshop sharpening on a 640x480 image (assuming low resolution). Moar resolving is like 6000x4000 image from a good camera/lens. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by koiloco View Post
 

or the question is how flat is the measuring equipments?  Does anyone ever wonder about that?  I do all the times.  :D

 

The best approach relies on a combination of ear training and experience (particularly studio / pro, building amps or speakers) and measurements to confirm and keep us honest. There's much more to sound than measurements. But measurements are one of the basic tools. The trained ear should be the final decider. 


Edited by purrin - 3/25/14 at 3:47pm
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