Link to my review and measurement index thread where one can also find a full review overview, more information about myself as well as my general-ish audio and review manifesto:
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/956208/
I only give full stars. My ranking/scoring system does not necessarily follow the norm and is about as follows:
5 stars: The product is
very good and received the "
highly recommended" award from me.
4 stars: The product is
very good and received the "
recommended" award from me.
3 stars: The product is
good/very good, but not outstanding/special enough to get any of my two awards. ["Thumbs Up"]
2 stars: The product is
only about average or even somewhat below that and
somewhat flawed/flawed in some areas. [neither "Thumbs Up" nor "Thumbs Down"]
1 star: The product is
bad/severely flawed to
outright bad. ["Thumbs Down"]
Superlux HD668B
Source:
Review sample.
Miscellaneous:
Pretty inexpensive.
Unlike my Superlux HD681 that came packed in a cheap see-through plastic packaging, the 668B arrived in a proper packaging.
Included are a storage bag (feels quite cheap, but it's much better than nothing at this price point) that I already know from my HD668B as well as a similar 3.5 to 6.3 mm adapter, but in addition, there are also two cables and a clip that secures/locks the cable joint. I'm using the shorter 1 m cable.
It's obvious that the HD668B have adopted design elements from several AKG and Audio Technica headphones.
The plastic used on the headphones feels quite cheap but rather sturdy.
Proper strain relief on the cable and good flexibility. Cable attached to the left ear cup, which is the industry standard. I like the clip that secures/locks the extension cable in place.
Cable extension is a standard 3.5 mm TRS plug, so any regular headphone extension cable could be used in theory.
Cable microphonics are fairly low, which is nice.
Comfort is decent but not great.
The pleather ear pads are rather shallow but the case is not as bad as on my Fostex T50RP Mk3.
The headband size is self-adjusting but the comfort or pressure distribution aren't great due to the split design.
Clamping force is on the higher side.
There is a bit of passive noise isolation, but not to the degree of most fully closed-back over-ear headphones.
Sound:
I have the shorter (1 m) of the two extension cables attached.
Tonality:
V-shaped with elevated mid- and upper bass ass well as upper middle and upper treble.
The midrange is definitely nicely tuned and follows a flat, diffuse-field oriented tuning wherefore voices sound natural and realistic – something that is especially nice to hear on headphones this inexpensive.
As the bass and highs are elevated, though, the midrange is perceptively ultimately pushed further into the background of the mix.
The lows stay nicely out of the mids and don't start to climb before about 550 Hz; they then reach their climax somewhere around 100 Hz with an elevation of around 8 dB of what would be neutral to my ears, with a subjectively perceived strong, bassy impact. Level stays there down to 60 Hz; below that, the bass starts to roll off.
Therefore, the midbass and upper bass are the most elevated areas, however the sub-bass isn't lacking at all and definitely present with similar quantity as the central mids, however probably not fully down to the very lowest registers where it is perhaps a bit below the mids’ level.
The upper middle and upper highs as well as super treble are then elevated, with surprisingly high evenness wherefore the highs are bright but fairly (but not fully) realistic, although undeniably tuned more towards the “fun” side.
Resolution:
Very decent – even more so considering how little these headphone cost.
Pretty clean sounding bass that is only a bit on the softer side. Details are good, but not the most separated (sounds a bit blunt), despite being fairly tight and fast.
Decent midrange resolution and speech intelligibility – nothing sounds grainy here.
Treble resolution is good, but fast attacks could be rendered a bit cleaner.
Soundstage:
On the smaller to average side with almost just as much spatial depth as width.
Reaches about from the left from the right ear cup and about to where my eyes are located.
Imaging and separation aren't as clean as on some of my more expensive headphones, but the imaging is anything but blurry and remains decently precise and distinguishable even when more complex music is played.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Comparisons:
Superlux HD681:
The HD668B sound bassier to me.
Deep bass extension on my HD861 is minimally better by ca. 3 Hz, but not much and only audible when performing sine sweeps.
The HD681 are brighter, leaner (and therefore less realistic) in the mids.
The same goes for the treble where the HD681 are brighter and peakier – out of the two, the HD668B are definitely the better-tuned headphones.
The HD681s’ bass sounds a bit cleaner and tighter in comparison.
Both are similarly resolving in the mids and highs, with the HD861 appearing airier in comparison (but most likely only because of their tuning).
The two headphones’ soundstages are nearly identical to my ears, with the HD681s’ being perhaps just a tiny bit wider.
Fostex x Massdrop TH-X00 Mahogany:
Way different price league, but several similarities.
Both sound v-shaped.
The bass boost starts about similarly on both headphones until 100 Hz, with my Fostex being a bit less full in the root, however below 100 Hz, the TH-X00 continue to climb further and further, and start to roll off much lower than the Superlux that are already really good in this regard, wherefore they have got considerably more sub- and midbass quantity than the cheaper headphones, with an overall more sub-bass-driven sound signature. Due to this more sub-bass-driven signature, they are the even more engaging and fun sounding headphones in the lowest registers.
The Fostex’ upper mids are more in the background, but not subdued.
The upper middle highs are clearly brighter on the Superlux, whereas the TH-X00 are tuned brighter in the starting super treble.
Out of the two, the Fostex’ highs sound more realistic and natural.
In terms of resolution, the Fostex are ahead, but the gap towards the Superlux is not as gigantic as one may thing. Not at all, in fact, as the latter still perform very reasonably when compared to the former that are ultimately however superior by a good bit in about every aspect regarding resolution.
Therefore, the Fostex’ bass rendering is cleaner, tighter, faster, better controlled as well as better layered; in the mids, they are more layered and detailed as well as refined sounding, which also applies to the highs.
The soundstage size is comparable with the TH-X00s’ appearing overall just a bit larger in terms of spatial width and depth.
In terms of imaging, though, the soundstage is cleaner and better focused on the Fostex, with superior instrument separation, a better portrayal of “emptiness” around tonal elements, and an overall more authentic imaginary room. Directly compared, the Fostex’ soundstage also collapses less when fast and busy music tracks are played, even though the Superlux do a good job at this as well.
Conclusion:
Recommended.
Inexpensive, well-tuned v-shaped fun sounding headphones with good technical performance and even midrange response.
Photos: