Are the sennhieser hd-600 a good headphone for rock music or would something else be better suited for that kind of music?

Well, I have hd580, and I listen to some rock. They're magic, imho. I listen to radiohead a LOT. Very detailed, and an ENORMOUS sound stage. Its very scary to hear things behind you.

depends on the kind of rock. if it's like Live, Radiohead, it'd be great. but heavier stuff could do with more power in the bass, more forward sound. I found Rage Against The Machine very pittyfull sounding through Senns, not the powerfull and angry band they are.

Grados are supposed to be great for rock. I'm just passing on info, though.

Noooo!!!!! Never use HD600s for rock! The best Rock headphones are the MX400s, which I will trade you for your HD600s, as long as you're willing to pay the shipping both ways! I hope I've gotten to you quickly enough here -- I wouldn't want you to have to suffer with those lousy HD600s for rock!
.
.
.
.

Seriously, though -- I like the HD580/600s for everything I've listened to, including hard rock. They have plenty of bass -- I don't agree with Braver on that point. I think they're a wonderful all-around headphone.

It depends on the recording. They'll work fine w/ some, and sound not aggressive enough for others.

Tom - I think they're great for Rock. But I think I'm going to give team Grado another chance by auditioning the Alessandro MS II ASAP to get that forward snappy midrange that thrives in rock music. I love the warm sound of Grado, it's just the other characteristics that I don't like (bright, fatiguing), perhaps the MS IIs are more forgiving? And/or I'll get used to the sound and end up enjoying it for rock.

If all I listened to were harder rock, at least as hard as Nirvana or more, I would probably just own Grados. I think they are less neutral than the HD600s overall, but all of their errors are great for rock music whereas any errors by HD600 seem better for classical, jazz, and slower music. The HD600 are still great for rock, enough so I couldn't justify keeping my Grados, but it would have been a tougher decision if all I listened to was hard rock/metal.

It's sort of ironic that we're having this discussion at all. Headphones ought to be good enough that we talk about which are better for music. Period.

Twenty years ago, audiophiles talked about which speakers were better for rock or classical music. Much less of that takes place now when talking about audiophile speakers.

But maybe that's because audiophiles who are older, with more money, listen to stuff that's less "fake" than what's listened to by kids used to MP3 as music, and speakers are much better than they used to be. I'm not trying to be my grandfather here, but the standards ought to be what real voice and instruments and music sound like, not which headphones sound best using recordings created using totally artificial sounds.

The standard is reproduction of music, not production of sound. I realize that the standard is getting harder to realize as some popular music gets further and further from reproducing a live musical experience to creating an artificial experience, but that's still the best way to figure out if any audio product is fundamentally neutral.

You can't compare what you hear through different equipment unless you know what the artist intended the original to sound like, even if that original was an artifice of electrons and digits.

Headphones seem to be pretty damned deficient if we have to separate them into different camps as we often do here.

Just my two cents worth of grumpiness.

Two words JML:
sound preference

My take on this is that since live reproduction of music is nearly impossible, I'll settle for what sounds good to me.

After a certain level, and up to a point, true. But when you're trying to assess basic quality of equipment, and too many others making decisions earlier in the chain have their own ideas of what sounds good, then it becomes a mess.

JBL Century 100 speakers used to be used in many mixing studios two or three decades ago, and if you had them on hand at home, they sounded great on stuff mixed to sound great on them. But they were terribly colored on other stuff, and decidedly not neutral. They were "rock" speakers. AR and KLH were "classical" speakers. I hope we're past that point now, but apparently we're not as far as many headphones go.

I agree with JML somewhat here.It seems headphones are less "neutral"than loudspeakers have become.When I listen to headphones they all have a unique sound which makes each of them more suitable to different types of music.When I listen to loudspeakers, many of them(except for horns and electrostatics) sound the same.I think headphones are one of the last areas in hifi that sound can be tailored to a particular type of music by changing equipment,at least at a reasonable cost.I hope the manufacturers of headphones don't fall into a rut and start making headphones that all sound the same.there is a reason so many low-priced loudspeakers get reviews comparing them to much more expensive models,they all sound alike.This is why I think the headphone market will grow.

I seriously doubt that there is some speaker or headphone that just "reproduces music" better than every other comparable speaker or headphone. Better in many ways, with many instruments and voices and sounds, perhaps--but just better in all ways? I don't think so. And if not better in all ways, with all instruments and voices and sounds, then we can distinguish by genre, because genres use different instruments and voices and sounds.

HD600 is the most accurate headphone I've heard yet. However the HD600 is not perfect, and its flaws don't affect every instrument or voice or electronic sound in the same way--thus its flaws also do not affect every genre of music in the same way. The HD600's flaws tend to hurt the most with rock music. I don't think I'm alone in thinking this either. IMO the Grados I've heard are more flawed overall than the HD600, but their flaws are different, and hurt less with rock.

I personally don't use different headphones for different music, and so I own and use the HD600 for everything. However there are others that do so, and for them it is quite useful to know which headphones work better with which genres of music.

Also we're not even touching on that whole ball of wax that is price. I could say the HD600 reproduces music better than every single $20 headphone in the world, and I doubt many would argue. A lot of good that does for someone that has $20 to spend and listens to rock. At most price points you will find enough headphones that are close enough (or far enough!) to the ideal--each one in its own special way--such that it is meaningful to discuss them in relation to genres of music.

Look @ my profile.
The Senns is my main cans.
And i listen to mostly Metal.
My HD600 can handle MEtal quite well. Rich and thick mids with crashing highs. Only wish is for a more prominent lows. But do note that the lows go way way deep under.

At the end of the day its how you pair it all up(CDP & Amp & IC) that matters.

System SYNERGY is the number 1 factor.

The HD600's really shine with complex musical styles, no matter what they might be. So if you like your rock or metal complexed, then the HD600 will be better for these types of music than even Grados. Grados are better for more simple types of music, which I feel sound better on Grado cans than Senns, IMHO.