[HipHopScribe]

You might have preferred Sennheiser's HD650 to the HD600 if you're a bass lover. To your question the answer is yes. Your preference is common in the audio world and is very well catered for. The only small sacrifice of going down the road of colouration and distortion is it becomes more difficult to see or hear what the artist actually recorded. It's an exchange: you lose something to gain something. In altering you will often lose something and big alteration means a big reduction in sound quality. I think of audio like a digital photo (although I don't believe in high res audio). If I take a picture outside my house and then display it on my TV I want to be looking at my TV like looking outside. To do this in the audio world is difficult and can be painfully expensive and only a minorty want this. I love music but don't want to alter the music in any way.

The 650s are still really rolled-off, especially the low bass. You get more of a midbass hump than the 600s, but they're still not a headphone for a bass lover. They're acceptable for genres with more of a slow, midbass focus, like they're decent for hip-hop, but if you get into any music that needs deeper, quicker bass with a lot of impact, the 650s aren't gonna be ideal either, neither the quality or quantity is gonna cut it

 

[ADUHF]

Hey there. I am not very helpful at that price range, but it looks like plenty of other people can offer valid recommendations (including the VModas, which are often recommended to people who want bass).

I listen to a lot of electronic music, which uses the bass frequencies more than some other genres. ZMF Verite Closed are absolutely beautiful for bass. ZMF Eikons also have excellent subbass in particular. I also think the amp that you use makes a difference, but headphones 1st.

Finally, for me, enjoying the discovery of different gear and the affinity I have for different kinds has been a fun part of the journey. Go to a shop where you can listen. Buy something and return if if you don't like it. The forums can help point you in a direction, but it is only a general pointer. Your ears, your money, your opinion are all that matter.

Thank you for the suggestions, chrisdrop and others.

I haven't looked too much at the ZMF products because (as noted above) they are out of my current price bracket. Most of what I've heard about them has generally been positive though. Crinacle has plots of the ZMF headphones on his graphing tool, along with several other higher-end and also some lower end cans. Just scroll down the list of headphones to select them. The ZMF Verite Closed and Eikon both have excellent extension in the bass...

https://crinacle.com/graphs/headphones/graphtool/

There are some other headphones on this tool with a bit more bass which can be used for comparison purposes, including the AudioTechnica M50x, the Sony MDR-Z1R, Drop x HDX Panda, Campfire Cascade, and AudioTechnica A990Z.

You can look at more than one headphone curve at a time by "PIN-ing" them with the headphone tools below the graph on the right hand side. And you can also move and stretch the graph in the vertical axis to better see the differences using the bullhorn shaped tool (I can't really think of a better way to describe it) along the left-hand side of the graph. Click on either either end of the "horns" on that tool to stretch the graph in the vertical axis.

The Panda, Cascade & AT A990Z are all somewhat bassier than the ZMF Verite Closed, but a bit too forward in the upper bass for my tastes. For reference purposes, the headphone with the response that's probably closest to what I'm personally looking for in the bass is probably the AT M50X. The M50X is a little too recessed though in the lower treble, giving it a bit of a V-shape. And I prefer a somewhat less bumpy, smoother transition between the midrange and bass. It's probably also a bit too bright in the treble for a true bass fan.

The AT M50X is close to what I would consider a "neutral response" though (with the exceptions noted above). And other plots make it appear a bit more forward in the upper bass than the Crinacle graph, esp. in the left channel...

https://www.rtings.com/headphones/1-4/graph#295/4011

(I haven't figured out how to select the left channel on the Crinacle plots.)

I have never really liked the SQ or fit of the M50X though, for other reasons. It is not a badly made headphone. But just made of rather inexpensive materials, which don't produce the best sound quality or fit imho. And it's sound signature is not as smooth in some spots as I'd like. (The clamping force is also rather high on the M50X, which makes it more painful on my ears.)

I don't mind a little more elevation in the bass as well, relative to the treble. I will look around to see if I can find a headphone with the response (and also smoothness) that's a little closer to what I want. I'm not sure such a headphone exists though, yet. Either on the higher, or the lower-end. Because I keep looking... And looking... And looking... And never really finding it. At least not in an over-ear design... There are some which are close though. Or at least in the ballpark.

I also tend to listen at lower volumes as well. So a little bit of Fletcher-Munson U-ness is not necessarily a bad thing in my book. I can add more of that with an EQ though, if needed.

Also perhaps worth a look on the Crinacle graph is the Closed version of the Audeze LCD-2C. It has a bit more energy in the treble though. And a rather nasty lookin spike right in the middle of the sibilant range at 6 kHz on this graph, which could be a little piercing. I'd have to look at some other plots to confirm that though, as it looks like some spikiness in that region may be fairly normal on Crinacle's plots. Stopping my pointless rambling now.

 

[ADUHF]

You might have preferred Sennheiser's HD650 to the HD600 if you're a bass lover. To your question the answer is yes. Your preference is common in the audio world and is very well catered for. The only small sacrifice of going down the road of colouration and distortion is it becomes more difficult to see or hear what the artist actually recorded. It's an exchange: you lose something to gain something. In altering you will often lose something and big alteration means a big reduction in sound quality. I think of audio like a digital photo (although I don't believe in high res audio). If I take a picture outside my house and then display it on my TV I want to be looking at my TV like looking outside. To do this in the audio world is difficult and can be painfully expensive and only a minorty want this. I love music but don't want to alter the music in any way.

^ This is actually a great analogy for why it's NOT always best to have an exact reproduction of sound or images in certain conditions. If you took a picture outside in the daylight, during the day, and then looked at it on a typical TV screen or monitor in darker surroundings at night in your home at the exact same luminance levels as the original scene, it would probably make your eyes bleed. Some adjustment to both the brightness and gamma (midtones in video geek-speak) is not only preferable, but usually necessary in such a case to make the photographed scene appear more like the original in the darker viewing conditions in your home. And much of that is usually handled transparently and automatically within your video recording and display devices.

The same can be true for different listening conditions as well. If, for example, you are listening to a recording at a much lower sound level than the original performance, it might sound extremely dead or too forward in the mid-range to capture the same feel of the original performance without some alteration to the frequency response and tonal balance.

Because our sight and hearing does not always behave the same way in different lighting or listening conditions, some alteration of the original recordings or images is often preferable or necessary to better approximate the feeling of the original conditions in which they were made. It depends alot on the circumstances though. And certainly some kinds of adjustments can be more harmful or destructive to the artist's original intent than others.

There are also alot of alterations to recordings which are done by expert (and sometimes not so expert) sound designers and engineers before a recording ever reachs your speakers, or headphones, or car audio system, which may already account for alot of the above. And that has to be factored in as well.

 

[RikudouGoku]

You can love bass and still be an “audiophile” and music lover. But not all bass is equal, even if equal in quantity. I actually prefer IEMs b/c I like a lot of bass, and often don’t like the resonance that some closed back headphones have. Bass that is deep, accurate, reasonably fast, punchy, and not boomy or muddy, is awesome.

"Bass that is deep, accurate, reasonably fast, punchy, and not boomy or muddy, is awesome. "
Exactly what I prefer.

 

[der luda]

The whole discussions, who ... why..which devices you have to have for audiophiler are with me very much.

Listening to music is my passion, the best hardware to do so ... I'm looking for myself, my own interests and personal tests.

Listening ... and experimenting, tinkering with electronics, that's what makes it all for me, hobby ... audiophiler

 

[Sefelt103]

^ This is actually a great analogy for why it's NOT always best to have an exact reproduction of sound or images in certain conditions. If you took a picture outside in the daylight, during the day, and then looked at it on a typical TV screen or monitor in darker surroundings at night in your home at the exact same luminance levels as the original scene, it would probably make your eyes bleed. Some adjustment to both the brightness and gamma (midtones in video geek-speak) is not only prefeable, but usually necessary in such a case to make the photographed scene appear more like the original in the darker viewing conditions in your home.

All I was trying to convey with this rough analogy is the colour and brightness/contrast control can be set so my TV image looks similar to a picture inside or outside a room, it can also be adjusted to produce a colour saturated, overly bright image similar to that of TVs in showrooms which is an inaccurate representation of the real world. It is true that just by representing sounds digitally or pictures with pixels you are inherently altering the original form. That's unavoidable, I'm trying to avoid further deterioration.

 

[Chris Kaoss]

I think there're two types of "audiophiles" at this time.
1 is listening to toys and gadgets,
the second is listening to quality music. ^^

My thoughts on this topic:
An audiophile is a person who love to listen, regardless to what he or she is listening.
Even if you like to listen to the birds singing in the woods. ^^
Unfortunately, the term has been changed over time.

Don't worry about that.
If you love music and listening to, you're an audiophile.

Happy listening and stay well.
Chris

 

[StarTreker]

Well, then by that logic, I am most certainly an audiophile, as I love listening to music. There are some people who only listen to lyrical music though, and look down on pure instrumental. For example, I love a lot of music that is in video games as well, there has been a lot of great compositions over the years written for games. But I often find people who will hear it and say its crap, but they will listen to lyrical songs all day long. I just look at those folks as people who haven't had a real chance to braudon their musical pallet. I like most genera's of music, both lyrical and instrumental.

But I will admit that I am more of a basshead then anything else. I'm not the kind of person who enjoys high frequency so high that it is ear piercing hurting the ears. Those people who do, tend to hate bass, and listen on can's that has practically no bass to speak of. This is a perfect headphone to illustrate this point... Acoustic Research AR-H1. That is the type of headphone where you actually have to drop your high frequencies down into the negative a bit. But even if you razed the sub-bass frequencies, it still would not please a basshead, because the headphone just lacks the ability to properly push sub-bass frequencies alltogether.

Then you look at the other side of the spectrum, the ultimate basshead cans, JVC SZ1000 - SZ2000, they will make a basshead pop a nut! However, their mids and highs are so recessed, that the cans would naturally anger any lover of treble and mids out there. Infact, Zeo's actually reviewed a set of cans from the JVC series and hated them. But he also doesn't do EQ either, so like I always say about him, take his reviews with a grain of salt. If a person was just to use EQ and raze the high frequencies, it would do a lot better in that area. However, even still, a closed back can as that is, still won't please someone who wants the full clarity of an open backed can for listening to classical music.

I've heard the difference between a open and closed back can on Zeo's demo's, when it comes to a guitar string being plucked, you most certainly can hear the difference between each can, its quite obvious. So ya, we all have different sound tastes for sure. But I have never found a can that can push both bass as well as treble, flat out of the box, just as hard, without needing EQ to help it. I also agree with the other person on here who mentioned that depending on the amp you use, can also alter how well the cans can push the sound. I most certainly have witnessed this, its all about how much power you can push to the drivers.

And of course, our basshead hobby is all a balancing act of power vs distortion. Eventually you reach that point in which the drivers can't do no more, and they begin distorting. So like I said, a balancing at and finding the ultimate power in the universe, in itty bitty living space. HAHA

 

[Markolav]

I love music. Sony guy from day one almost. Walkman, Sony hifi and some panasonic. Sony MP3 and then iPod with sony headphones.

After a new friend impressed me with his hifi i looked at audiophile headphones as its a personal experience for me. Late night and family these days...

So i got the HD600's and amp etc. Flat, bass like poo hitting the floor. Then the M50x because i saw headphones and amps would be for my personality a money pit. Loved the detail. Mind blowing in fact but no excitement for me.

Got myself (theme) Sony XB900's from the extra bass line and i'm in head subwoofer heaven. Haven't touched my M50X's since. When the power hits that's what i like. I sampled many others from Sony, Bose including the QC's and XM3's etc even Beats models. I have studio 3's for the car they work fine.

Do i just not get it? Am i just a music lover? I think of a home TV theater and what these flat sound profiles would do to a movie? If we were in our cars with ear bleeding detail (treble) happy? Or the warmth and power?

"Bass like poo hitting the floor" lol I have to write that down. If liking bass does not make you an audiophile then I´m not audiophile either. I rather choose substantial than adequate amounts of bass (this is of course relative to the genre, not all music necessarily require it). I like listen to music like electronics, R&B and hip hop quite a bit and they dont simply provide any satisfaction if bass is "just there", in the past I used headphones that had barely any bass oomph at all because I thought it was "audiophile" and when I finally tried something bassier I realized how much I was actually missing. We have all heard that "I dont need bazz"... Nah they´re lying.

 

[laimonas23]

I have developed a need for proper bass recently, after quite a few years of listening experience. One of the turning moments arrived when I listened to some iems lacking in bass (or maybe I could not get a proper seal?), and I just couldn't listen to music on them... So it seems I need my share of bass after all That said, I find my hd 650 quite adequate for the listening I do (jazz, rock, acoustic, vocals).

 

[StarTreker]

Like many other's on here, I am not able to utilize IEM's. For one thing, no cheap 20 dollar IEM's ever sounded good to me. (<<<---Maybe that was the issue regarding sound, they were cheaper then my last date!) Plus, IEM's, always fall out of my ears, they just don't wanna stay in there! (And trust me, neither did she!)

My first experience with on ear headphones, were all those cheapo POS Sony walkman headphones, remember how crappy those sounded? You'd get distortion just cranking the volume up to 30%. My second experience with on ear headphones, were with my wireless Kinivo BTH220 and BTH240 bluetooth headphone. Those 20mm drivers have mid-base range, but thats about it, but at least they sound better then those old Sony's! I can drive them up to pretty much 100% volume before noticeable distortion.

I upgraded to my largest driver wireless can yet, the over the ear Cowin E7 Pro's with 45mm drivers. Now those things perform all frequency ranges including down to sub bass to probably about 55HZ. They tend to muddy in the mids a bit, so they could use EQ to balance it out, but they are a pretty nice can for wireless, I got to admit.

But at the end of the day, nothing beats the pure orgasmic satisfaction of a 50mm driver or larger, wired can. Wired is just where its at, you pump a watt or more of raw amp power into a set of cans, and they open up like your memorable first date experience.

 

[IEMusic]

IEMs will never be like large dynamic or planar driver over ear HPs, but I still prefer them, and always have. I do understand that do to individual ear anatomy, a lot of people just can’t use IEMs. Way back in the Walkman and Discman days, I always preferred the small Sony “earbuds” connected by a headband. They always had a lot more bass than the on-ear HPs then. Now, I like IEMs b/c I can get more sub bass with them than with most HPs. Just a personal preference, nothing more.

 

[Chris Kaoss]

That's why i like the Monitor 5.
If there is sub bass, you'll get it right, if not you will not.
It shows the truth with the most accuracy of all headphones i've own and owned while it's a closed back headphone.
But for enjoying the music deeply i'd pick the Era-1 over the Monitor 5.
It's great to switch between these two to discover all the music out there in different ways.
Glad i got them with me.

 

[CTR640]

But I don't get it why audiophile-graded headphones shouldn't have bass. That's pretty bs. I'm so glad I have Amirons, although the Amiron Home has really lovely bass.

 

[ADUHF]

But I don't get it why audiophile-graded headphones shouldn't have bass.

They should!