Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › HD800 vs LCD-X vs HE-6 vs SR-007 for critical listening and monitoring purposes?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

HD800 vs LCD-X vs HE-6 vs SR-007 for critical listening and monitoring purposes? - Page 4

post #46 of 81

I'd side with the HD800 for monitoring and critical listening sessions and possibly even the K812. Personally I'd go with some monitors that are designed specifically for the job, but hey I'm just a speakers guy.

post #47 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by icebear View Post
 

I only have a HD800 and none of the other 3 you have as alternative. So I can only comment on the Sennheiser.

 

The HD800 has the best sound stage of any headphone, that is something even critics can agree on. Everything else is getting a little difficult. This headphone is ruthlessly revealing any flaws and it's doing this with a level of detail that will be surprising or shocking to some.

 

If the recording is crap it will sound crap. If it's something that was pieced together from multitracks recorded at different locations - it will sound like that. Something stitched together. That maybe a reason why a lot of folks claim the HD800 is not suitable for that kind music. No matter what and who and with what kind of technology, it's not a homogenous live recording with all musicians interacting and timing their playing together. And you will hear this on the HD800. If any of you sources, amp, cables has an issue, you will be able to hear this.

 

So it's up to you if you want this level of authenticity. It might not always be pleasant.

If everything comes together, it will create that big smile on you face though ;-)).


strongly agree! I only have hd800 and HE500 for years. Record quality is critical for HD800, it sounds crap if the record is not well made or technique in record is outdated. it is not euphonious compared with R10

post #48 of 81

I am surprised at how many people on here are pointing to the HD800's flaws (hot treble, potential lean sound) without discussing the extremely cheap and effective fix which is the "anaxilus" mod. it instantly rebalances the sonic spectrum and ads more meat to the bone for a tiny investment. I use the Woo audio WA7 with the new tube PSU from which i only use the amp section as it is fed by my classe audio omega pre amp itself being fed by a double PC/jriver/jplay/emm labs dac2 setup and find it an extremely capable match with the HD800. When well partnered the HD800 are very hard to fault and a very good substitute to my classe audio cam-350 and magnepan 3.6R, when needed. I think they scale very well to a high end setup.

post #49 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pecari View Post
 

I am surprised at how many people on here are pointing to the HD800's flaws (hot treble, potential lean sound) without discussing the extremely cheap and effective fix which is the "anaxilus" mod. it instantly rebalances the sonic spectrum and ads more meat to the bone for a tiny investment. I use the Woo audio WA7 with the new tube PSU from which i only use the amp section as it is fed by my classe audio omega pre amp itself being fed by a double PC/jriver/jplay/emm labs dac2 setup and find it an extremely capable match with the HD800. When well partnered the HD800 are very hard to fault and a very good substitute to my classe audio cam-350 and magnepan 3.6R, when needed. I think they scale very well to a high end setup.

 

When properly colored* you mean? 

 

The HD 800 is not a headphone worthy of being called high-end. There, I said it.

post #50 of 81

The HD800's do not have the faults

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pecari View Post
 

I am surprised at how many people on here are pointing to the HD800's flaws (hot treble, potential lean sound) without discussing the extremely cheap and effective fix which is the "anaxilus" mod. it instantly rebalances the sonic spectrum and ads more meat to the bone for a tiny investment. I use the Woo audio WA7 with the new tube PSU from which i only use the amp section as it is fed by my classe audio omega pre amp itself being fed by a double PC/jriver/jplay/emm labs dac2 setup and find it an extremely capable match with the HD800. When well partnered the HD800 are very hard to fault and a very good substitute to my classe audio cam-350 and magnepan 3.6R, when needed. I think they scale very well to a high end setup.

 

The HD800's do not have the faults you mentioned, they are just showing you your system is not up to scratch for a headphone like the 800's.

You even, deliberately of not, say it yourself with the term 'potential lean sound'. The HD800's either have a lean sound or not. Potentially signifies a variable which is not the phone so it can only be the source or amp.

 

My un-modded HD800's do not have a bright or harsh treble or a lack of body, and I use silver cables, a neutral SS amp and a Sabre32 DAC!

 

Absolutely have no need or intention of modding mine.

post #51 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lan647 View Post
 

 

When properly colored* you mean? 

 

The HD 800 is not a headphone worthy of being called high-end. There, I said it.

 

No disrespect intended but if your equipment listed in your profile is anything to go by then it's no surprise you feel the HD800's are not high end.

 

I don't think anybody who as run the HD800's properly can deny they are 'high end' whether they actually like them or not.

 

A properly driven HD800 will easily better ,for example, any Audeze phone for bass control, speed, detail, clarity and openness.

Are not the LCD3's, X, XC classed as high end


Edited by nigeljames - 5/18/14 at 9:13am
post #52 of 81

I don't see why the HE6 cannot work in this application. Amped properly it dredges out a tremendous amount of detail (in a more blatant, direct manner than the HD800). Someone mentioned a lack of soundstage. That's crazy imo. Out of an Odyssey Stratos Plus the staging is very large and immersive. Bottom to top these headphones have the potential to knock your socks off. They are very amp particular or so I have found. 

 

* I haven't heard the LCD-X, but I own the rest. 


Edited by ericfarrell85 - 5/18/14 at 9:54am
post #53 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by nigeljames View Post
 

 

No disrespect intended but if your equipment listed in your profile is anything to go by then it's no surprise you feel the HD800's are not high end.

 

I don't think anybody who as run the HD800's properly can deny they are 'high end' whether they actually like them or not.

 

A properly driven HD800 will easily better ,for example, any Audeze phone for bass control, speed, detail, clarity and openness.

Are not the LCD3's, X, XC classed as high end

 

The further I kept reading this ^ post, the more certain I became of its stupidity.

First of all, I sold my equipment. I ran the HD 800 of a Musical Fidelity M1HPA and very good DIY USB DAC with ultra-low jitter and a very expensive (relative towards many other DACs) clock. I did not enjoy that combo, so I sold it. 

I have also tried the HD 800s with Sennheiser's own HDVD800 with a good source and balanced cabling, supposedly a great combo. It was good by HD 800 standards, but not good enough for me. 

The HD 800 does some things very well, including transient response, openness and imaging. But it's an unnatural sound that's always on the thinner and brighter side of neutral no matter how much you pay for the gear around it (unless it's tubes involved, in which case you can get ride of the thinness and brightness, but that's not a fair way to judge the headphone IMHO). 

Saying the HD 800 betters the Audeze's for bass control is just stupid. It just has less bass. Less bass may sound like more controlled bass but if you look at measurements the Audeze's are VERY clearly superior in the bass. And that's also how I hear them. They also have a more natural tonality and vocals sound much more realistic than through the HD 800, where they sound dry and lacking in organic body. 

My current STAX system is also vastly superior to my previous HD 800 system. 

EDIT: Oh, and by the way. No disrespect from me either but if you say my gear is not on par, you should take a look inside that Audio GD amp of yours or measure its performance.  


Edited by Lan647 - 5/18/14 at 10:08am
post #54 of 81
M1HPA is a terrible amp for any headphone. I'd rather plug into my cell phone.
post #55 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxvla View Post

M1HPA is a terrible amp for any headphone. I'd rather plug into my cell phone.

 

Do explain why you think so? I personally found nothing particularly wrong with it, plenty of gain and very transparent. Was great for the LCD-2s. 

post #56 of 81
With HD800s - coarse treble, no layering in the sound, lacking bass quantity and tendency to one-note the bass. I felt like I was listening to 128kbps mp3s.

Some of these effects happen with LCD-2s naturally, lack of layering and one note bass, the treble is muted so that would be less noticeable, and LCD-2 has enough bass quantity to cover any failings in the amp.
post #57 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lan647 View Post
 

 

It was good by HD 800 standards, but not good enough for me. 

 

 

So does this qualifier: "not good enough for me" endorse your sweeping statement that the HD800 is not 'high end'?

post #58 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxvla View Post

With HD800s - coarse treble, no layering in the sound, lacking bass quantity and tendency to one-note the bass. I felt like I was listening to 128kbps mp3s.

Some of these effects happen with LCD-2s naturally, lack of layering and one note bass, the treble is muted so that would be less noticeable, and LCD-2 has enough bass quantity to cover any failings in the amp.

 

I agree! But that's the HD 800s you were hearing, not the amp. I've seen measurements of the M1HPA and along with the specs (provided they are truthful, of course. But they should be when it's such a major audio company like MF) there is nothing to imply the amp would bottleneck the HD 800s. A friend of mine who is an audio engineer also confirmed for me a few years ago the M1 is a solid buy for performance. 

I compared the M1 with the Burson HA-160 (using the HD800) and the latter was clearly the lesser performer. The sound was not as refined and had a tendency to get harsh, with somewhat distorted bass. This can be backed up with measurements I've seen on Innerfidelity of the Burson HA-160D. 

post #59 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by seb7 View Post
 

 

So does this qualifier: "not good enough for me" endorse your sweeping statement that the HD800 is not 'high end'?

 

I have a single simple qualification for a headphone to be described as "high-end" in my book: it should sound like real life. 

post #60 of 81
I find the soundstage of the hd800 to be unrealistically large. For large ensembles, it is great as there are enough sounds to fill the soundstage and still pick out details you would otherwise miss. But try and listen to 4 piece rock band. It will sound like the band members are playing in different venues. It becomes obvious that the soundstage is extremely untrue to reality. With so few sounds, it becomes hard to enjoy the music as you lose sense of overall music. So depending on what I am listening to or monitoring, the hd800 may or may not be useful. You can more easily pick out flaws and details, but depending on the size of the sounds, you will lose a sense of the overall musicality.
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 › HD800 vs LCD-X vs HE-6 vs SR-007 for critical listening and monitoring purposes?