[sennsay]

HD540 Ref1s No 1 v HD540 Refs No2: After so many years now with the utter smoothness of the No 1s, even just a smidge dark compared to many new cans, and the relatively 'bright' No 2s, I have at last pulled apart the No 1s just to see if I had done what I was now suspecting, blocked some of the airflow to outside of the ear cups. I could always gets stunning out of head and cans soundstage and compared to the 'newer' No 2s the blackness from which the images appear is still superior, the No 2s simply behaving more like the original HD540s with stock cables; ie, the upper mids and treble having the trademark grain and edge at times, if ameliorated somewhat by the Mogami cable. It can be recording dependant and a fine recording indeed has a more open and slightly emphasised upper mid and treble, yet with clarity focus that is rather good, never a trace of rhythmic integrity being slowed down in any shape or form. They also have a more integrated and natural bass response that can kick firmly in focus and detail without any thickening of the bass with the new wang pleathers.
So, I pulled apart the No 1 HD540s, discovering that I had indeed at some time replaced the outer foams with a thin foam over a cloth base. When I put it over my mouth and puffed some air through it, it was noticeably more restrictive than a new 4mm foam from wang. Not completely restrictive, but it certainly took more effort than the far more open weave foam. I cut the requisite pattern out and replaced both sides with new 4mm foams, very close to the original size, from memory. It's no wonder the bass was always warmer and more 'tube-like' than the No 2s. With the drivers checked and a little cleaning out of a few hairs, I put the No 1s back together and tested them out, using the QP1R/Modi Multibit and Stello SP100 headphone amp. Ah, now there is a better balance, but no trace of that upper mid/treble exposure of the other pair. Same cable, same foams - or within fractions of a mm. Hmm, the only other thing I can think of is the tiny piece of foam that goes immediately behind the pole piece of the drivers. Maybe I have put a new bit in that is a tad dense, a bit hard to gauge as the original foam from Sennheiser had basically dissolved on touching it. I did not touch those pole pieces in the No 2s, so I will take a look at them and see what is there, probably the original foam piece, I'd imagine.
However, on playing the first few minutes of the Doors track, When The Music's Over, that fantastic bass keyboard riff that runs through much of the track in the LC, is more constricted with the No 2s, a little closer to the earcup than I've heard many times from the No 1 Refs, which is out and down, uncannily below the earcup by my left shoulder. That slightly coarse grain affects the space between the vocals and some superb drumming behind Jim Morrison, a disappointment compared to the No 1 Refs using the KHA 1 headphone amp where the space behind Jim is so clear back to the drum kit, which gave a fantastic performance out in space.
The journey continues.

 

[trollchu]

So I recently cut my hair for the first time in well over a decade, and I've been getting a much better seal out of my Reference Gold than I ever did before. The sound with just a better head seal has had me feeling like I've been rediscovering this headphone all over again a first time, despite me using them all the time. The lush mid-band and the resolution of the tall coherent stage really instill the idea in me that this is a flagship.

Recently, I've got a new tube amp and I find I'm getting a different response than I'm used to from these, where the sound is noticeably more forward, more tall, more grand, and less wide, but with an incredible breath of space between the stage. It's a more in my head experience than I expected from these, considering, of all my headphones, only this one has become more forward with this amp thus far. The experience is quite a nice departure from what I'm used to in my chain. Usually, when I pair these with the tube amp I've had for many years now, my experience is quite different from that, it's wider, and more resolute, with a similar, but possibly bigger, breath of space between the instruments. Thinking about it, I haven't tried it with a lot of different tube amps despite many opportunities.

The few times that I've taken these out of the house and I've tried them with other tube amplifiers I'm less familiar with, I've often found HD540 to be hit or miss. I'm definitely convinced the sole issue is me not liking certain pairings, such as when pairing this with a WA-33, me, not liking the TT2 and M Scaler as a source. That's got me wondering, do you guys like your HD540s with tubes, do you tube them?

 

[IgorUA]

That's got me wondering, do you guys like your HD540s with tubes, do you tube them?

Hi Trollchu. I sometimes use my HD540 ref I with a tube OTL amplifier, which is a high-quality copy (not a Chinese one) of the Darkvoice 336 with unused soviet tubes that was once unboxed for the first time. This amplifier gives you more sound compression (imagine that you're pressing the headphones to your head with force) and gives you more midrange and bass, making the sound softer for long listening, but without losing sound detail.

What is the serial number of your Gold headphones? Which ones are the best of them if you've tried listening to different series? I'm searching for Gold and wondering which series is the best? The old 600 ohms, the newer 600 ohms, or the newest 300 ohms?

----------

I also sewed the ear cushions yesterday, trying to maintain the technology with which they were designed. I used 2 strips of foam and put this silk ribbon between them. The foam inside is slightly under pressure and holds the shape of the pads very well. My Reference I's sound good with them, very detailed and open, but I hear too much high frequencies. It's literally uncomfortable to listen to and sometimes even painful if you turn up the volume. I would also like to add that my 600 ohm Reference I are made exactly like the Gold ones, with these 2 white felt disks in the front of the drivers and one disk in the back of the buffle, and all the necessary seals. Everything is fine with me except for this peak at about 8 kHz, which I can hear clearly when I'm using the frequency generator. In this area, the sound turns into a squeak and seems to resonate. Does anyone know how to overcome this without compromising the sound detail?

 

[sennsay]

Well, I'd love to have another tube amp or preamp again. My experience with the HD540s has always been a better one with tubes/valves somewhere, usually the preamp. After selling my fabulous Elekit TU8500 preamp around 18 months ago, I now really miss the brilliance of running my DACs into it and into the KHA 1 amp. Previous to that was a Schiit Valhalla 2 tube amp which I sold off and had no regrets, there was something about the midrange and treble that didn't gel with the HD540s for me. Around the same time I had a TRI TRV 88SE integrated full tube amp, a bit of kit I really loved and although designed for speakers it also had a headphone jack. Sounded really grunty and full of life. (See pic below). There are a number of tube amps for headphones I'd love to try out, but I'm about to move interstate and once I'm settled a bit I will investigate some new gear. Another fabulous preamp was an early valve preamp from the inimitable Trevor Lees, in Melbourne, man that thing was brilliant into the KHA 1 amp using my stock HD540 Refs! It seems that for me at least, a valve preamp into a good headphone amp is a real treat, even the Sonic Frontiers SFL-1 hybrid preamp I had for a while gave astonishing results that I can still remember to this day some 3-4 years later.
I wouldn't mind assembling a Project Ember 2 amp either, or the Sparkos Gemini.

 

[sennsay]

This is the state of the outer foams of my No 2 HD540s, no wonder they sound brighter and thinner of tone in the upper mids and treble! They are obviously the original foams and the burnt orange foamy part is falling apart, needing to be gently brushed out of the back of the driver. What is interesting, is that the tiny piece of foam behind the driver pole piece is intact and not disintegrating like those in my long time originals. They can stay.
Also what I have discovered is that the dark orange foam side should be on the inside of the ear cups, not the outside and you can clearly see where the driver support frame has left its marks. So, what I did for the no2 HD540s was use the outer fabric with the thin foam backing that I'd taken out from my No1 Refs, putting the fabric backing on the outside this time, unlike I had them in the No 1s, and reassembled them.
Result? Now that's better! Still an ever so slightly 'pinched' upper mid and top, although some would call it as very fine focus, but not as splashily forward and almost bright as it was, certainly so compared to the No 1s. Playing The Door's, When The Music's Over again, the drummer's playing becomes an event in itself and clearly behind the lead vocal in it's own space, as does the guitar (RC), and that wonderfully lilting bass keyboard down to the left and below the earcup. These qualities are still ever so much better with No 1 Refs, I am more in touch with the event, my body responds with more enthusiasm, but there is less of a gap between the two pairs of HD540s now. Why they still sound like slightly different versions of the same series, I have not really found out yet, it's almost as if the No2 HD540s are 600 ohm HD540 IIs with the frequency lift in the upper mids. In every other aspect though, they are identical to my original pair, labelled exactly the same, maybe they are a later version of the HD540s just before the HD540 IIs came out, I have yet to check serial numbers.

 

[IgorUA]

This is the state of the outer foams of my No 2 HD540s, no wonder they sound brighter and thinner of tone in the upper mids and treble! They are obviously the original foams and the burnt orange foamy part is falling apart, needing to be gently brushed out of the back of the driver. What is interesting, is that the tiny piece of foam behind the driver pole piece is intact and not disintegrating like those in my long time originals. They can stay.

Thanks for the advice! Yes, I tested the headphones without any foam at all and I hear even more high frequencies. I tried to restore all the foam as I imagine it to be judging by the way it disintegrated and the way it was in the Gold headphones. I have a dense acoustic fabric on the back and it is pressed down by the foam disk. Please take a look at my setup and maybe you can tell me what could be wrong. I adore the sound of these headphones, but I have a lot of high frequencies. I compare the sound to my other favorite headphones HD660, which I can use endlessly and my ears don't get tired.

 

[Backsplash7]

Thanks for the advice! Yes, I tested the headphones without any foam at all and I hear even more high frequencies. I tried to restore all the foam as I imagine it to be judging by the way it disintegrated and the way it was in the Gold headphones. I have a dense acoustic fabric on the back and it is pressed down by the foam disk. Please take a look at my setup and maybe you can tell me what could be wrong. I adore the sound of these headphones, but I have a lot of high frequencies. I compare the sound to my other favorite headphones HD660, which I can use endlessly and my ears don't get tired.

I wish I had those two felt whit rings for my 540II, I still can't go back to them due to the sibilance, which I'd bet those things help with

 

[sennsay]

Thanks for the advice! Yes, I tested the headphones without any foam at all and I hear even more high frequencies. I tried to restore all the foam as I imagine it to be judging by the way it disintegrated and the way it was in the Gold headphones. I have a dense acoustic fabric on the back and it is pressed down by the foam disk. Please take a look at my setup and maybe you can tell me what could be wrong. I adore the sound of these headphones, but I have a lot of high frequencies. I compare the sound to my other favorite headphones HD660, which I can use endlessly and my ears don't get tired.

Blimey, from what I hear the HD660s are not dull headphones, so if your HD540s are brighter than they are that is not normal ...... unless you are still using the stock cable that came with them! That combination WILL give you exposed, forward and grainy upper mids and top end, I had many years of it, ameliorated somewhat by the use of quality valve preamps ahead of the SS amps. I loved them anyway, while being very aware of that little frequency quirk.
You have the Gold versions and from everything I've read here (I've never heard a pair) they ought to be a little more refined and I would personally not expect them to be bright. The stock HD540s ARE a little forward, being improved versions of the studio HD430s, which were supremely detailed and focused in the vocal range, mine still are even with new foams and pads, brilliant for radio back in the day and listening to YT videos now.
I suspect that silk is too dense a material for the pads, Sennheiser used a deliciously soft cloth with their original pads, it sounds like you are getting HF reflections that shouldn't be there. Personally, I couldn't stand headphones without good foams - as they were designed to be with - the trick is the right density. We may never hear our HD540s as they originally were created - unless we have a mint version out of the box to compare with, and we may find they really were a little uncouth compared to some of todays highly refined headphones. True, the fine qualities of the HD540s are their superb instrument timbre and irrepressible rhythmic integrity, and that is what I love the most about them with either pair of HD540s I have here and the HD430s.

 

[sennsay]

Thanks for the advice! Yes, I tested the headphones without any foam at all and I hear even more high frequencies. I tried to restore all the foam as I imagine it to be judging by the way it disintegrated and the way it was in the Gold headphones. I have a dense acoustic fabric on the back and it is pressed down by the foam disk. Please take a look at my setup and maybe you can tell me what could be wrong. I adore the sound of these headphones, but I have a lot of high frequencies. I compare the sound to my other favorite headphones HD660, which I can use endlessly and my ears don't get tired.

And thank you for the pictures. Very interesting to see the white felt rings and I can see that the foams behind the pads seems to be really packed into every part of the driver frame, as in the 2nd jpg ending in '912', mine were never that packed in. Maybe the white felts add pressure on the foams and push them into every gap. Is this normally so for the HD540 Golds?

 

[IgorUA]

And thank you for the pictures. Very interesting to see the white felt rings and I can see that the foams behind the pads seems to be really packed into every part of the driver frame, as in the 2nd jpg ending in '912', mine were never that packed in. Maybe the white felts add pressure on the foams and push them into every gap. Is this normally so for the HD540 Golds?

Unfortunately, what you see here is a custom headphone. I had Reference I and Reference Gold, in which I broke the wiring on one of the drivers. So I decided to make my Reference I 600Ohm with the buffle and felt pads from the Gold. The standard Reference I buffle has a stiffer material and does not have a felt disk on the back. I don't like the sound with it, it sounds more like a speaker built into a cardboard box. When I built the Reference I speaker to the Gold buffle, I was very surprised at how much better the sound was. Everything is in its place: the bass and midrange levels are somewhere around the HD660 level, the soundstage is much wider and all the nuances of sounds are reproduced. But the level of high frequencies is very high, and I can hear how they stand out in a certain spectrum. With the standard buffle, there were even more high frequencies. Maybe it's my copy of Reference I that's like that. I compared with one working speaker from Gold and it gives much less high frequencies and more midrange.

I also use my headphones with the standard cable from the HD660. I tried the silver-plated cable and it emphasizes the high frequencies even more.

Maybe I'll buy Golds again someday, if they don't cost too much.

 

[sennsay]

Unfortunately, what you see here is a custom headphone. I had Reference I and Reference Gold, in which I broke the wiring on one of the drivers. So I decided to make my Reference I 600Ohm with the buffle and felt pads from the Gold. The standard Reference I buffle has a stiffer material and does not have a felt disk on the back. I don't like the sound with it, it sounds more like a speaker built into a cardboard box. When I built the Reference I speaker to the Gold buffle, I was very surprised at how much better the sound was. Everything is in its place: the bass and midrange levels are somewhere around the HD660 level, the soundstage is much wider and all the nuances of sounds are reproduced. But the level of high frequencies is very high, and I can hear how they stand out in a certain spectrum. With the standard buffle, there were even more high frequencies. Maybe it's my copy of Reference I that's like that. I compared with one working speaker from Gold and it gives much less high frequencies and more midrange.

I also use my headphones with the standard cable from the HD660. I tried the silver-plated cable and it emphasizes the high frequencies even more.

Maybe I'll buy Golds again someday, if they don't cost too much.

Ok, thanks for clarifying that. From what I've heard about the HD660's, especially the new HD660S, I think I'd like them and will look at hearing a pair once I get more settled in my new home. I'm going to leave both of my HD540s as they are for the time being, I can enjoy them as slightly different flavours of the same thing, even if I still don't yet understand how they can be different.

 

[IgorUA]

Ok, thanks for clarifying that. From what I've heard about the HD660's, especially the new HD660S, I think I'd like them and will look at hearing a pair once I get more settled in my new home. I'm going to leave both of my HD540s as they are for the time being, I can enjoy them as slightly different flavours of the same thing, even if I still don't yet understand how they can be different.

Sennheiser HD660 (I have an old version) are great headphones that can be plugged into a regular 3.5mm output and you can enjoy great sound. They just have a great sound signature that is suitable for most genres of music. I like them better than the HD600 and HD650. But my HD540s give me a little bit more when I listen to records that have been recorded and mastered really well. My HD540s have sharper and clearer highs, which can be tiring, while the HD660s are just fine with that.

 

[sennsay]

Sennheiser HD660 (I have an old version) are great headphones that can be plugged into a regular 3.5mm output and you can enjoy great sound. They just have a great sound signature that is suitable for most genres of music. I like them better than the HD600 and HD650. But my HD540s give me a little bit more when I listen to records that have been recorded and mastered really well. My HD540s have sharper and clearer highs, which can be tiring, while the HD660s are just fine with that.

Yes, after owning Senn HD650's and a pair of HD6xx, I was happy to move them on fairly quickly, the HD540's just gave, and give, me so much more, even though they have a little less midrange fine detail. They make me joyful to listen with, the 650's just didn't have that. I am looking forward to some new cans for a different perspective now though and I reckon the HD660S may be first cab off the rank. The Meze Elites/ Empyrians might have to wait a while