There is a dearth of owners/posts on SA3k/SA1k - I think a comparison of the three new models (and Qualia 010's, for that matter) would be cool, as I honestly don't know if the SA5k's are worth the price premium over the other models.
So a few more random thoughts on the SA5k's. I think mine have finally finished burning in, which puts the burn-in period closer to 200 hours than 100. The highs just sound a lot smoother (bearable?) than they did originally - I find I can listen to a lot of recordings now that had originally been way too harsh/bright/hot through the SA5k's. Or maybe it's just me getting used to the increased detail.
Out of the HD650+Zu, CD3k, Sensaphonics 2X-S sitting in my apartment right now, the SA5k's are definitely my favorite phone by a significant margin.
I've been listening to the HD650s a bit more these last few days, so a few comparisons. A small caveat -the Zu needs a bit more burn-in (the HD650's and cable are new - only at about 100 hours right now) so I'm sure the HD650's will refine its sound over the next few days, but the changes ought to be fairly incremental.
The soundstage of the HD650's is fuller. Not necessarly wider, but more spread out than the SA5k's. I like the fuller soundstage of the HD650's, but having gotten used to the SA5k's, sometimes the HD650's sound a bit too filled out? Like someone hit the "reverb" button on a synthesizer. But still, the SA5k's sometimes sound a bit too focused in terms of soundstage, sometimes you kinda wish it was a bit less center stage.
HD650's also have a nice flat tonal range (remember, I'm coming from HD600's) - with a slight and very enjoyable bass-boost/emphasis compared to the perceived flat-as-glass response of the SA5k's. I'm wondering why the SA5k's just sound more neutral/accurate as a reference. One could say the HD650's (or Sensas) are the flatter phone, with the SA5k's having recessed bass and overemphasized highs. But, while initially, I thought the SA5k's had overemphasized highs and recessed bass, my perception of what "neutrality" and "accuracy" mean has just flipped. I perceive the SA5k's to be the neutral reference now.
Speed - no comparison that the HD650s are slow compared to the SA5k's. A lot slower. Also, as everyone knows, the HD650s are on the dark side. Because of this, they don't sound as "real to life" as the SA5k's. I think lan was the one who said this - but real life is detailed, and sounds move ultra-fast. Now that the SA5k's don't seem to be as blindingly bright as they were initially, the Senn HD650s just seem way too polite. I miss the upfront honesty/reality of the SA5k's when listening to the Senns now.
None of these Senn traits are bad things - fuller soundstage, flat range with a nice slightly emphasized bass, polite and not in your face but still okay presentation of detail. But it just seems there are these layers and distance between me and the instruments that made the music and I lose the real texture of the sound.
Listening fatigue is still an issue with the SA5k's. I listen for hours on end - the Senns never tire my ears, while with the SA5k's after a long listening session, I can feel it.
I still think one of my early analogies characterizes the SA5k's for me - they're like applying unsharp mask and auto-adjusting the levels in Photoshop. They just bring this detail and reality to the underlying music that aren't there without such processing. Now which is more neutral and accurate, the original photo or the photoshop'd one... I'd say the latter.
Incidentally, I reserve the right to take back anything I said once I get the Qualia 010's. And while the Senns aren't getting the play I would have expected (having cut my teeth on the HD600's), they still have a place on my shelf.
Lately 90% of my headphone listening has been in bed, so the rig for these thoughts are:
Crappy J-Pop music encoded as uncompressed .wav on iRiver iHP-140 -> Toslink (el-cheapo Monster fiber-optic cable) -> Grace m902 (xfeed on) -> SA5k/HD650.
Best regards,
-Jason
). Seriously, there has been several threads abot these headphones.
