[mikoss]

I bought a box to do instant A/B'ing on the fly, and came to the same conclusion... it's incredibly difficult to ascertain the differences on the fly, most of the time. My preference and what really does work for myself is listening for a couple of days and/or a solid week, then switching equipment and jotting down initial impressions. Much more reliable in my opinion, which I think is what you guys said. There is the odd time where I can go for an hour or two and then swap, but the differences are more stark if I give myself a longer time.
 
As for the sound science of specs/THD and the ability to properly represent the music, that's a can of worms I'll happily avoid. It's worth noting that live (acoustic) performances are probably the most "natural" way to listen... albums get mastered, ran through filters, tubes, compressors, etc. before they even reach us. I do admire audiophiles interested in the notion of relying on specs, but personally I'm not. The best presentation I've heard recently (on speakers) was from the Devialet 120, which has extremely, extremely tight specs... have yet to shell out $7k to try it as a headphone amp for the HD-650s. Wonder if someone rich who enjoys the O2 could buy one and give us impressions... 

 

 

[Olympus Mons]

Haven't really been listening to a lot of headphones for awhile but getting back into it. Put on Jeff Buckley's Grace through my Burson HA-160DS and it sounds absolutely amazing. Really like this combo and while the HD650s aren't Grado's they can sure rock when properly amped.

 

[Krutsch]

Originally Posted by mikoss /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
<snip, snip>
 
It's worth noting that live (acoustic) performances are probably the most "natural" way to listen... albums get mastered, ran through filters, tubes, compressors, etc. before they even reach us.
 
<snip, snip>

 
I was at a concert listening to Anne-Sophie Mutter, playing with a piano accompaniment. Just being in the same room was magic for me.
 
Anyway, ASM plays un-miked and un-amped; I had row three seats, but far off to the left, and after some time came to the realization that the sound was a little, I don't know, dull. At the time, I started wondering if my perspective was jaded from a lot of listening with Grado cans. It was this episode that started me looking for new 'phones (leading me to the HD-650 - yeah! I'm back on thread topic).
 
Since then, and listening to more live classical concerts since, I wonder if the perceived sound had more to do with my seats, not that I was acclimated to overly bright cans. Now, I am wary of trying to seek a "live" performance experience with either headphones or speakers - live is it's own experience, as is recorded listening.

 

[Sundown]

Sidegrading from HD600's. Grabbed the Adorama sale. Hopefully I'll love the more lush and warmer sound. The HD600's are just a tad bit anemic in the sub bass. How does the mid range compare to eachother? I like the HD600 midrange.

 

[TsukiNick]

Thinking of selling the HD650s since I got the LCD2 Revision 1 quite a nice improvement same nice Dark sound but better bass and treble.

 

[kman1211]

  Sidegrading from HD600's. Grabbed the Adorama sale. Hopefully I'll love the more lush and warmer sound. The HD600's are just a tad bit anemic in the sub bass. How does the mid range compare to eachother? I like the HD600 midrange.

Think the HD 600 midrange but even better and more beautiful. 

 

[castleofargh]

  As for the sound science of specs/THD and the ability to properly represent the music, that's a can of worms I'll happily avoid. It's worth noting that live (acoustic) performances are probably the most "natural" way to listen... albums get mastered, ran through filters, tubes, compressors, etc. before they even reach us. I do admire audiophiles interested in the notion of relying on specs, but personally I'm not. The best presentation I've heard recently (on speakers) was from the Devialet 120, which has extremely, extremely tight specs... have yet to shell out $7k to try it as a headphone amp for the HD-650s. Wonder if someone rich who enjoys the O2 could buy one and give us impressions... 

 

I can go with the idea that since the track is messed up anyway, it's useless to focus on going for fidelity. I can really understand that, I tend to go with the idea that the audio engineers are artists too and so I try to get if possible an ok rendering of what they tried to express. but that's just my own way too look at it, and yours is just as fine.^_^
 

  I bought a box to do instant A/B'ing on the fly, and came to the same conclusion... it's incredibly difficult to ascertain the differences on the fly, most of the time. My preference and what really does work for myself is listening for a couple of days and/or a solid week, then switching equipment and jotting down initial impressions. Much more reliable in my opinion, which I think is what you guys said. There is the odd time where I can go for an hour or two and then swap, but the differences are more stark if I give myself a longer time.

about this, I'll answer with a quote from wikipedia :

Leveling and Sharpening: memory distortions introduced by the loss of details in a recollection over time, often concurrent with sharpening or selective recollection of certain details that take on exaggerated significance in relation to the details or aspects of the experience lost through leveling. Both biases may be reinforced over time, and by repeated recollection or re-telling of a memory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_memory_biases

 

[HPiper]

  Sidegrading from HD600's. Grabbed the Adorama sale. Hopefully I'll love the more lush and warmer sound. The HD600's are just a tad bit anemic in the sub bass. How does the mid range compare to eachother? I like the HD600 midrange.

Main thing they did on the 650 was to lower internal resonances, the result of which is lower distortion. The 650 midrange is almost identical to the 600 but clearer and more transparent, so in a word, yes it is better.

 

[ButtUglyJeff]

  One of the things that constantly amazes me is how easily I can be fooled into thinking wow this is sounds amazing or the resolution is incredible or the background is inky black only to discover what I thought was inky black isn't really or suddenly details that I wasn't even aware of before now have their own textures and micro details themselves.
 
Its definitely a bit of a journey this hobby.

 
I'm far from an expert.  But I'm starting to come to the conclusion that if I say "wow" in the first five minutes, I'm just aware of the difference from what I was used to listening to.  The real wowing should start happening many hours of listening later.
 
It could be argued that being underwhelmed at first is often a good sign that pleasurable listing awaits you.  And you might have stumbled upon a setup that might be correct or accurate for you...

 

[sinnottj]

  It could be argued that being underwhelmed at first is often a good sign that pleasurable listing awaits you.  And you might have stumbled upon a setup that might be correct or accurate for you...

 
I'd agree with this!
 
I tried the Beyer T90 a while back and my initial reaction was 'WOW, all that detail!'. Turns out it was too much detail (or too much detail in the foreground) for me to actually enjoy listening to them ...
 
On the other hand, I've just obtained a brand new HD650 and, while I wouldn't say I was underwhelmed, there's no 'wow factor'. They just seem to take everything I like about the HD600 and make it a little smoother and more refined ... I think I like it

 

[Solrighal]

I'm of the opinion that most headphones on sale today are voiced to grab your attention. You know how TV's in the shop always have ridiculously bright glaring images? The first thing we do when that TV gets in our living rooms is to turn everything down. I think of the HD 650 in this way.

 

[Solrighal]

Sorry to double post but another thought came to me. I often read that the 650 is not so good when it comes to louder, more aggressive rock music. I didn't really believe that with my O2 but couldn't be positive. Now that I have the Ember I can categorically state that to be a falsehood. These cans rock!

 

[sinnottj]

I'm of the opinion that most headphones on sale today are voiced to grab your attention. You know how TV's in the shop always have ridiculously bright glaring images? The first thing we do when that TV gets in our living rooms is to turn everything down. I think of the HD 650 in this way.

 
Yeah, this is a good analogy.
 
No need to eq the HD650 to reduce the 'glare' that's for sure ...

 

[sinnottj]

Sorry to double post but another thought came to me. I often read that the 650 is not so good when it comes to louder, more aggressive rock music. I didn't really believe that with my O2 but couldn't be positive. Now that I have the Ember I can categorically state that to be a falsehood. These cans rock!

 
I can see why some people might say that, as (from my admitedly limited time with them) I find the midrange does smooth over the 'edge' of distorted guitars a little bit more than my HD600. Still sounds awesome to me, though 

 

[Solrighal]

I honestly love them. I don't really have the money to buy more expensive headphones and I likely never will but I'm comfortable with that. From what I read of others who have upgraded it seems to be a mixed blessing. Nothing else seems to share the same sonic characteristics.