Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Wow! Sennheiser HD 540 Reference are so good.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Wow! Sennheiser HD 540 Reference are so good. - Page 30

post #436 of 689

Nice work Maurice, thanks for sharing your efforts. I would like to add that I have noticed a difference between two types of my original HD540II velour pads. I will put up a picture of the two pads in a little while. In my pad video on Youtube, I described one set as having a thin pleather backing with a seam further back whilst the other type was completely velour material with a centre seam. The pad type with the thin pleather on the back has a larger opening; the radius of empty space is a bit bigger. I shall be comparing the stereo image produced by both types and shall discuss my findings here. I predict that the pleather back pad type with a larger opening will image better. We'll see.

post #437 of 689

 

Look at this rear view. I hope from the picture that you can notice that the opening of the pad on the right is larger than the opening of the pad on the left.

 

Now for a front view.

 

 

This picture doesn't show it as well but the right opening is a bit wider.

post #438 of 689

I don't know if you can see what I'm getting at but what if I were to modify a pair of pads as shown.

 

 

Rear

 

 

 

Front

 

 

The white area indicates the opening size, which would likely affect the perceived size of the stereo image. I shall have to try it.

post #439 of 689

Okay, front and rear views. The pad with the wider opening is on top and the pad with the smaller opening is placed underneath it.

 

 

 

 


Edited by o0CosmoMemory0o - 6/8/14 at 3:04am
post #440 of 689

my collections

CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 80 CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 80

 

CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 80 CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 80

 

CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 80 CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 80

 

CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 80 

 

 

 

 

CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 80 CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 80

 

 

sound quality: hd540g > hd430 > hd560  (hd560 > grado wooden cans > k812 > hd700 > hd650 = k701)

tonal fidelity: hd430 >= hd540g > hd560 (hd540 ref gold sound a bit too gorgeous, too beautiful,like its name,it really has a golden sound signature)

comfort:hd560 > hd540g > hd430

overall:hd540g > hd560 = hd430

 

all of them are very musical, the most musical dynamic cans I've ever heard

 

and early production is better than the late production, early production has better micro detail,better sound quality

more clear & stable sound image, even more musical.

(early hd540g SQ is better than hd800 & most stax lambdas,someone said the timbre of hd540 ref gold is closest to he90), 


Edited by pkshan - 6/8/14 at 4:44am
post #441 of 689
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkshan View Post
 

(early hd540g SQ is better than hd800 & most stax lambdas,someone said the timbre of hd540 ref gold is closest to he90), 

 

I think in the case of these old Senns where there is a lot of confusion about the relative differences between models, comparative frequency response and CSD measurements would be more than useful to solidify these impressions.

 

For instance, my HD 530, which certain people describe as better than, or identical to, the HD 540, are nowhere near e.g. a modded Unipolar. This would either place the modded Unipolar notably above the HD 800 and the Lambdas, or imply that Sennheiser, in the midst of their usual small, incremental improvements, came up with a radically better dynamic design that was only used in random models (HD 540 Gold, HD 540 II, etc., depending on whose impressions they are) and ditched soon after.

post #442 of 689
Quote:
Originally Posted by vid View Post
 

 

I think in the case of these old Senns where there is a lot of confusion about the relative differences between models, comparative frequency response and CSD measurements would be more than useful to solidify these impressions.

 

For instance, my HD 530, which certain people describe as better than, or identical to, the HD 540, are nowhere near e.g. a modded Unipolar. This would either place the modded Unipolar notably above the HD 800 and the Lambdas, or imply that Sennheiser, in the midst of their usual small, incremental improvements, came up with a radically better dynamic design that was only used in random models (HD 540 Gold, HD 540 II, etc., depending on whose impressions they are) and ditched soon after.

 

430s,560s,540s are flagship models, hd530s aren't..

(540 ref golds are the best of the best Senn dynamic cans,the most expensive model,& the only one that came with a wooden box)

 

"II" are cost down models.

 

experienced human ear is the best measuring instrument.

music & hifi are art-related stuff.

in this regard, human brain is thousands times better than a super computer


Edited by pkshan - 6/8/14 at 7:37am
post #443 of 689

It's a choice between measurements or listening impressions that have been biased by considerations of price, extra trinkets, and whether the model was thought by someone else to be a flagship or not. But what I'd rather take are both measurements and soundly based impressions that loop back to the measurements to allow for a firmer basis, given that you can't judge sound quality when nothing's playing.

 

Besides, if you want to continue the analogy of the brain as a hypercomputer, add in the various mental biases and you have a hypercomputer running some exceedingly bugged software.

post #444 of 689
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkshan View Post
 

my collections

CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 80 CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 80

 

CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 80 CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 80

 

CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 80 CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 80

 

CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 80 

 

 

 

 

CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 80 CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 80

 

 

sound quality: hd540g > hd430 > hd560  (hd560 > grado wooden cans > k812 > hd700 > hd650 = k701)

tonal fidelity: hd430 >= hd540g > hd560 (hd540 ref gold sound a bit too gorgeous, too beautiful,like its name,it really has a golden sound signature)

comfort:hd560 > hd540g > hd430

overall:hd540g > hd560 = hd430

 

all of them are very musical, the most musical dynamic cans I've ever heard

 

and early production is better than the late production, early production has better micro detail,better sound quality

more clear & stable sound image, even more musical.

(early hd540g SQ is better than hd800 & most stax lambdas,someone said the timbre of hd540 ref gold is closest to he90), 

 

I've always loved the look of the Sennheiser HD430. One day i will buy one just for the looks. BTW, do you use the HD430 cable with that funky connection or you can use a cable from the HD560?

post #445 of 689

I now need to buy a HD530, HD540g, HD430 a Unipolar 2000 and a HD800 to compare with my HD540 II (it might be a low cost model but I still think it is amazing and yes if anyone has FR curves to compare with modern HP that would be great, indeed ).

BUT: My wife will be upset !:) 

 

By the way if you guys have (additional) subjective :)  recommendations for DAC / amps that pair well with HD540 II (or alikes....) that would be great.Still wondering how to upgrade my all in one TEAC AI-501, if I upgrade I'd prefer a balanced setup. 

post #446 of 689
Quote:
Originally Posted by o0CosmoMemory0o View Post
 

Okay, front and rear views. The pad with the wider opening is on top and the pad with the smaller opening is placed underneath it.

 

 

 

 

 

Interesting stuff. Yet another difference to consider in the way we perceive our 540's.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TominJapan View Post
 

I now need to buy a HD530, HD540g, HD430 a Unipolar 2000 and a HD800 to compare with my HD540 II (it might be a low cost model but I still think it is amazing and yes if anyone has FR curves to compare with modern HP that would be great, indeed ).

BUT: My wife will be upset !:) 

 

By the way if you guys have (additional) subjective :)  recommendations for DAC / amps that pair well with HD540 II (or alikes....) that would be great.Still wondering how to upgrade my all in one TEAC AI-501, if I upgrade I'd prefer a balanced setup. 

 

Tom, we both own the D200. How's the 540 II with it? I no longer have one but I think they combine really well. Impressions?

post #447 of 689

 

 

Last night, I used staples to hold together a HD540II pad pair containing new HD560 foam. This is just for testing and will make them easier to sew up. So I clipped the earpad pair into the capsules with some thin cloth and had a listen. Pads are very firm, keeping the ears further away from the drivers. The opening size on these modded pads are not any bigger than before and I'm not sure if the soundstage has improved but I do feel that the sound is more balanced than before. The pads seem to attenuate any minor treble glare and improve the bass response IMO. Pleased with what I heard. I shall have to make the opening size on the next set larger by cutting away some of the velour material in the middle.

post #448 of 689

You guys are giving me the gas for a pair HD540. To be honest im really curious to hear them and compare to my HD560II

@o0CosmoMemory0o you are doing an excelente job comparing these headphones with various ear pads. It's a shame Senn doesn't sell pads for them right now.

post #449 of 689
Quote:
Originally Posted by the Ortherion View Post
 

 

I've always loved the look of the Sennheiser HD430. One day i will buy one just for the looks. BTW, do you use the HD430 cable with that funky connection or you can use a cable from the HD560?

 

HD430 cable & HD560 cable sound different.

I don't swap cables,because they will sound incorrect

some hd430s use a different plug

 

 


Edited by pkshan - 6/9/14 at 3:49am
post #450 of 689
Quote:
Originally Posted by moriez View Post

Interesting stuff. Yet another difference to consider in the way we perceive our 540's.



Tom, we both own the D200. How's the 540 II with it? I no longer have one but I think they combine really well. Impressions?

nope I have not bought a D200 yet still hesitating vs D18 or maybe DA8 and looking for an amp, too ... There are too many options to choose from, a total nightmare tongue.gif
btw, How could you possibly sell your Hd540ii?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Wow! Sennheiser HD 540 Reference are so good.