[Currawong]

I've merged both threads since answers were posted in both.
 
IMO, after spending years pondering this, I've decided to stick with the HD-800s and orthos. Why? Because I could go with SR-009s and a BHSE, but that's a $10k investment in an amp that can ONLY be used with 'stats and a pair of headphones that can ONLY be used with a 'stat amp. If there is anything I don't like about the 009s, such as them being unsuited to some kind of music I want to listen to, I'm stuck with the result. It is a shame, because in many ways they are outstanding, beyond anything else, but I also only have a handful of recordings that are really capable of showing that. I've also found a HD-800 set-up that suits me perfectly and the difference I intend to spend on suitably excellent near-field speakers, since I don't have to use headphones all the time now.

 

[darinf]

  What's his name?

The two guys from Moscow are both named Victor. I don't know either of their last names, just e-mail addresses.

 

[CybDev]

If you're using the SRM323S, then that would explain your "sub bass" comments...I had a similar issue with the LL. On the KGSSHV they rumble and offer detail and layering in the bass like to other I've heard.

Yeah the 323S was a limiting factor.
The LLmk2 has way more power in the lows, but I still miss that resolution from HD800. I'm not saying the SR-009 lacks impact or anything, and I think the LLmk2 actually gives it a slight boost in the lows, but I can't help but feel that for detail and layering the HD800 beat my SR-009s on anything below 80Hz.

Couldn't get my hands on KGSSHV or BHSE so sadly I wouldn't know about that, but apart from the "issue" just mentioned I'm very happy with the SR-009/LLmk2 combo.

For the record I still felt the SR-009 lacking in bass resolution when compared to the HD800 using SRM-006t, SRM-007t2 and SRM-323S when I got them, leading me to think that it may be can related and not amp related.
(At the time I thought the 323S to be the better option and got that while waiting for a LLmk2.)

 

[SoupRKnowva]

What you need is a KGSS or KGSSHV, cause I seriously feel as though there is a darn subwoofer attached to my 009s with my HV....these things are doing bass like even the LCD-3 couldn't

 

[CybDev]

There is no lack of bass, especially with the LLmk2, but in terms of resolution/detail on the parts of the music below 80Hz I just think the HD800 is better.

This is not to say the SR-009 is bad at all, but we are in the business of splitting hairs soo.....

 

[StubKidDtd2512]

   
If you're using the SRM323S, then that would explain your "sub bass" comments...I had a similar issue with the LL. On the KGSSHV they rumble and offer detail and layering in the bass like to other I've heard.

Hi MacedonianHero,
 
My setup for the 009 is exactly the same as CybDev's and I also think of upgrading to the KGSSHV. Besides more bass detail and quantity, will the KGSSHV make the 009's soundstage much wider and deeper to compare with that of the HD800? It's just that I primarily listen to classical music (especially concertos and symphonies) and I prefer big soundstage so that's one of the two reasons why I still keep both the 009 as well as the 800.

 

[negura]

There is no lack of bass, especially with the LLmk2, but in terms of resolution/detail on the parts of the music below 80Hz I just think the HD800 is better.

This is not to say the SR-009 is bad at all, but we are in the business of splitting hairs soo.....

 
What these guys are saying. The SR-009s are actually fantastic bass wise with the KGSSHV and other downstream options.
 
Until my KGSSHV is ready, I am using a transformer rig with a SET tube amplifier. This enabled me to compare dynamics and Stax voiced by the same amplifier. I no longer have the HD800s, but my memory of this is still fresh. While the HD800s also have nice bass, they are no match for the SR-009s with sub-bass or any bass in both quality and impact.
 
You should hear it as soon as you play anything with the SR-009s. With a suitable track, one should also get a "THAT is some really awesome bass" moment. I still do and this is from someone who has/had LCD-3s, SR007s MK1s (and HD800s).

 

[ericfarrell85]

Must it really be a choice between the two? I wouldn't think about selling the HD800, even with the SR009 (or anything else). Depending on mood, which we all know plays an enormous factor, and the nuances of a recording or genre, having both can be terrific. The short time I have spent with the SR009 has been very revealing (pun intended). They are the clearest window into a recording that I have experienced and by a considerable margin. This ultra resolution makes the pair very different from all the rest. The HD800 also provides that unique experience which cannot be matched by anything else. Besides the incomparable soundstage (people talk about the width, but its the Z axis that makes them so special) the Sennheisers are very linear in their FR transitions and have some of the smoothest, most inviting mids I have heard. I'm amazed how they managed to make this headphone so coherent as a whole. With the right recordings the HD800's are my fade away headphones (and if you're into ambient, well, this is the quintessential headphone). Still, the price of admission for the HD800 has been very high for me. Sure 10k minimum for the SR009, but it took all of a Balancing Act to really discover what the HD800 can do. 

 

[negura]

The Z-axis is probably more of a trait of something in your downstream than a HD800 advantage imho. If you were to hypothetically get the SR-009s on that exact downstream you may find what I found.
 
I was in the situation to have both HD800s and SR009s voiced by the exact same SET tube amplifier (and a converter for the SR009s, which according to some is a disadvantage for the 9s). Everything you say about the HD800s is better on the SR009s. The HD800s just lag behind on similar level amping no matter how I look at it. The HD800s soundstage may be wider, but it's less tall and less natural because of what was said on previous pages. SR-009: better mids - check, better more natural treble - check, better bass - check, a more linear frequency response - check, faster transients - check.  Much higher price - for sure, fully agreed.
 
Later edit: I see you have a Taboo. Try that with a Wee and with both if you can. It would be interesting what you think.

 

[Maxvla]

Negura, did it occur to you he meant what he said? Stop trying to make your opinion fact. I disagree with you almost point for point. I'll give you the cleaner treble, but nothing else. The unnatural soundstage of most planar designs ruins it for me. There is no center, no depth, just width. It's like people here don't expect headphones to give a live like experience so they are just content with side-only sound. Luckily HD800s (and a few others) and a great number of IEMs provide a live like experience or I probably wouldn't be interested in this hobby anymore.

 

[ericfarrell85]

  The Z-axis is probably more of a trait of something in your downstream than a HD800 advantage imho. If you were to hypothetically get the SR-009s on that exact downstream you may find what I found.
 
I was in the situation to have both HD800s and SR009s voiced by the exact same SET tube amplifier (and a converter for the SR009s, which according to some is a disadvantage for the 9s). Everything you say about the HD800s is better on the SR009s. The HD800s just lag behind on similar level amping no matter how I look at it. The HD800s soundstage may be wider, but it's less tall and less natural because of what was said on previous pages. SR-009: better mids - check, better more natural treble - check, better bass - check, a more linear frequency response - check, faster transients - check.  Much higher price - for sure, fully agreed.
 
Later edit: I see you have a Taboo. Try that with a Wee and with both if you can. It would be interesting what you think.

I don't understand. Take a look at my signature. I have the SR009. Everything I said comes from owning both pieces of equipment. I did not say the SR009 isn't a more technically able headphone. I said they both have their mutually exclusive uses. The SR009 does not replace the HD800 for me, nor can it for what I get from the HD800. 
 
*I have tried the Wee with a variety of amplifiers including the Taboo. I much preferred the KGSS I own and the BHSE I'll have at the start of next year, so thanks but no thanks. 

 

[negura]

I am sure one of the reasons many people read these forums is to get opinions. Ideally everyone should hear this stuff and make their own informed decision. I actually personally really wish diverse opinions are voiced (even challenging the status quo) and I really appreciate diverse points of view. One of the examples is the LCD-2s which were made to be the greatest headphones ever for a good while. I find little substance to that nowadays.
 
As I am a quite detailed analyser I have spent a lot of time comparing these headphones aiming for as much of a levelled ground as possible. I just pointed out where I have a second opinion. We happen to disagree which is fine with me. YMMV, FWIW etc...  
 
I also do understand it looks like I am putting the HD800s in an unfavourable light. I should reiterate what I said on the previous page. I enjoyed the HD800s and I consider them at the very top of dynamics, however when we talk a direct comparison between these two my opinion is that there is no contest. In particular in emulating a more realistic experience where the headphones just get out of the way as much as possible. Which by the similar sound signatures these two have is what they both are trying to achieve.
 

  I don't understand. Take a look at my signature. I have the SR009. Everything I said comes from owning both pieces of equipment. I did not say the SR009 isn't a more technically able headphone. I said they both have their mutually exclusive uses. The SR009 does not replace the HD800 for me, nor can it for what I get from the HD800. 
 

 
What I am trying to say is that I also believe the headphone isn't all there is. People often time compare these headphones on vastly different sounding downstreams. Which isn't exactly going to show a true picture and could sometimes be a bit misleading despite best intentions. If this isn't the case then obviously fair enough.
 
My opinion is that the SR-009s are actually a better all-arounder than the HD800s. The cleaner treble and more proportionate soundstage works better with genres where I just didn't care to use the HD800s. This is first hand experience too. I was surprised by this, because I have obviously read a lot of diverging opinons before getting my paws at length with these headphones.

 

[ericfarrell85]

  I am sure one of the reasons many people read these forums is to get opinions. Ideally everyone should hear this stuff and make their own informed decision. I actually personally really wish diverse opinions challenging the status quo are voiced and I really appreciate diverse points of view. One of the examples is the LCD-2s which were made to be the greatest headphones ever for a good while. I find little substance to that nowadays.
 
As I am a quite detailed analyser I have spent a lot of time comparing these headphones aiming for as much of a levelled ground as possible. I just pointed out where I have a second opinion. We happen to disagree which is fine with me. YMMV, FWIW etc...  
 
I also do understand it looks like I am putting the HD800s in an unfavourable light. I should reiterate what I said on the previous page. I enjoyed the HD800s and I consider them at the very top of dynamics, however when we talk a direct comparison between these two my opinion is that there is no contest. In particular in emulating a more realistic experience where the headphones just get out of the way as much as possible. Which by the similar sound signatures these two have is what they both are trying to achieve.
 
 
What I am trying to say is that I also believe the headphone isn't all there is. People often time compare these headphones on vastly different sounding downstreams. Which isn't exactly going to show a true picture and could sometimes be a bit misleading despite best intentions. If this isn't the case then obviously fair enough.
 
My opinion is that the SR-009s are actually a better all-arounder than the HD800s. The cleaner treble and more proportionate soundstage works better with genres where I just didn't care to use the HD800s. This is first hand experience too. I was surprised by this, because I have obviously read a lot of diverging opinons before getting my paws at length with these headphones.

There is nothing wrong with you offering an opinion, whether it goes with or against the tide. It's great that you listen closely also. But remember that there are so many variables to a setup, not to mention the variances in what we consider more or less important when evaluating a component. Your time with the HD800 was spent with the Taboo, an amplifier I generally did not like with the HD800. Everything else in our setups are different, from source and amps to conditioners, cables, converters, etc... It just stands to reason that we will hear things differently and have no reason to try and jam a point through. I don't consider the HD800 a great all-arounder. I don't feel it matches up technically with the SR009. I agree with these points. But, knowing what the HD800's do well in my setup, with the albums I enjoy, I cannot replace them with the SR009. 

 

[negura]

  There is nothing wrong with you offering an opinion, whether it goes with or against the tide. It's great that you listen closely also. But remember that there are so many variables to a setup, not to mention the variances in what we consider more or less important when evaluating a component. Your time with the HD800 was spent with the Taboo, an amplifier I generally did not like with the HD800. Everything else in our setups are different, from source and amps to conditioners, cables, converters, etc... It just stands to reason that we will hear things differently and have no reason to try and jam a point through. I don't consider the HD800 a great all-arounder. I don't feel it matches up technically with the SR009. I agree with these points. But, knowing what the HD800's do well in my setup, with the albums I enjoy, I cannot replace them with the SR009. 

I can't but agree here. 

 
 
P.S.: Except for the Taboo part. I've heard at length several amplifiers with the HD800s not just the former. And as a tubes amplifier I would recommend something like the Amperex EL84, Amperex 6922 and a Brimar or GEC U52 rectifier for the HD800s. Oh and a balanced connection.

 

[purrin]

 
My setup for the 009 is exactly the same as CybDev's and I also think of upgrading to the KGSSHV. Besides more bass detail and quantity, will the KGSSHV make the 009's soundstage much wider and deeper to compare with that of the HD800? It's just that I primarily listen to classical music (especially concertos and symphonies) and I prefer big soundstage so that's one of the two reasons why I still keep both the 009 as well as the 800.

 
No, the 009 will not give you the stage of the HD800 no matter the amp. The HD800 design essentially suspends two drivers slightly in front of your ears. Hard to beat that unless you go K1000. The only stat amps which may give you a taste of that sense of depth is the T2DIY, followed by the Electra with good tubes. As for the rest, especially if its solid-state, it's not even close. BTW, I've owned all that crap at one point in my life.
 

There is no lack of bass, especially with the LLmk2, but in terms of resolution/detail on the parts of the music below 80Hz I just think the HD800 is better.

This is not to say the SR-009 is bad at all, but we are in the business of splitting hairs soo..... 

 
The HD800 is just plainly more resolving (in terms of retrieval of low level information) than the SR009 on the right setup. Specifically, the SR009<-T2DIY was not as resolving as the HD800<-EC Levi/445 (using PWD2 as the source.) The SR009 does other things much better than the HD800 though.