[RRod]

   
I do care about room noise, and appreciate headphones that can reproduce it properly. It's one reason I like an open-back somewhat airy presentation. But I wouldn't say I dwell on it. It's mainly just hiss. If the FR graphs show relatively neutral presence in that region, and I can hear the room noise when the track starts, I'm done worrying about it.
 
Low bass is a great joy for me, not just the shake, but that sublime sensation that you can feel the room and the instrument breathing together. Cello, for instance, is a string instrument, not a woodwind or even percussion, and yet it breathes! That's magical to me.
 
 
Don't forget the accessories.  

 
Just buy one of these bad boys:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vc-RWrWxaCw

 

[Strangelove424]

Ha! Holy crap, that is some major LFE and the size is crazy. It reminds me of my high school strings orchestra when the teacher assigned the bass to all the football jocks. I always assumed it was because they could have supported it and transported it most easily. Nevertheless, those jocks really got in to their bass playing, and were a wonderful addition to the group.
 
Something about that particular bass above seems out of tune though, the resonate frequency of the string is so slow, and the way it wobbles... He said he worked for Hans Zimmer, I have a feeling if they used this instrument in an actual recording it would be for something like a highly adaptable and acoustically-derived LFE generator for movie soundtracks (as opposed to generating those continuous low tones digitally). Something where ominous doom and dread, regardless of tone richness, were a necessary part of the score. 

 

[Claritas]

I wasn't sure which subforum to ask this, but I've wondered if the increased treble response of the HD800 would compensate for my diminished hearing towards the upper frequencies? A frequent criticism of the HD800 is that its treble can be relatively overly bright, but considering that high frequencies (i.e. > 6 kHz) need more dB to sound equally loud as mid-frequencies (i.e. 1kHz) to my ears, do my old ears alleviate this unwanted characteristic of the HD800?

Although hearing decreases above 8 kHz, it can still be perfectly normal below that. So the 6 kHz bump on HD800 might not have any loss to compensate for and would still sound somewhat bright.

 

[ubs28]

  Hi,
 
I wasn't sure which subforum to ask this, but I've wondered if the increased treble response of the HD800 would compensate for my diminished hearing towards the upper frequencies? A frequent criticism of the HD800 is that its treble can be relatively overly bright, but considering that high frequencies (i.e. > 6 kHz) need more dB to sound equally loud as mid-frequencies (i.e. 1kHz) to my ears, do my old ears alleviate this unwanted characteristic of the HD800?
 
And just out of curiosity, am I missing much from music by basically being deaf to frequencies above 10 kHz?

 
Thanks.

The HD800 isn't a bright headphone, it's very neutral. The only way the HD800 sounds bright is if you compare it to dark headphones. 
 
I'd look elsewhere if you are looking for a bright headphone. 

 

[bigshot]

If you run a tone sweep through your ears, you'll find unique patterns of response. For instance, I am pretty good up to 16 or 17kHz (for now at least!) but there is a very narrow band around 5kHz where first one ear drops out entirely, then it pops right back and then the other ear drops out for a tiny sliver. I've heard little breaks like that are common. It isn't a wide enough band to notice. Kind of like the small blind spot in everyone's eye where the optic nerve interrupts the retina.

 

[Dark_wizzie]

 
The HD800 isn't a bright headphone, it's very neutral. The only way the HD800 sounds bright is if you compare it to dark headphones. 
 
I'd look elsewhere if you are looking for a bright headphone. 

No it's not. It's a bright headphone. Look at the FR graphs. 

 

[ubs28]

  No it's not. It's a bright headphone. Look at the FR graphs. 

 
Here is a frequency graph between the Sennheiser HD800 and an other studio headphone which is also very neutral. Where do you see brightness? Also the brightness of the HD800 is very similar to the Shure SRH 1840 soundwise (i'm listening to both headphones right now). 
 
The only way that the HD800 sounds bright is if I listen to my Shure SE846 for 15 minutes and then switch back to the HD800 because the Shure SE846 simply lacks treble extension. 
 
Blue = Sennheiser HD800.
Red = Shure SRH 1840.
 

 

[Dark_wizzie]

   
Here is a frequency graph between the Sennheiser HD800 and an other studio headphone which is also very neutral. Where do you see brightness? Also the brightness of the HD800 is very similar to the Shure SRH 1840 soundwise (i'm listening to both headphones right now). 
 
The only way that the HD800 sounds bright is if I listen to my Shure SE846 for 15 minutes and then switch back to the HD800 because the Shure SE846 simply lacks treble extension. 
 
Blue = Sennheiser HD800.
Red = Shure SRH 1840.
 
 

It looks less favorable to your point if you don't use the artificially smoothed out graph that hides dips and peaks.

 

[ubs28]

  It looks less favorable to your point if you don't use the artificially smoothed out graph that hides dips and peaks.

 
Now you blame headroom? Besides I am also using my ears against other neutral headphones and I clearly hear that the HD800 is neutral. Or are you suggesting that the Shure SRH 1840 is also a bright headphone?
 
Professionals use the AKG K240 for mixing and mastering and that headphone is way brighter than the HD800. If you think the HD800 sounds bright, your chain is bad. 
 
But if you think the HD800 sounds bright, then let's agree to disagree. 

 

[bigshot]

  It looks less favorable to your point if you don't use the artificially smoothed out graph that hides dips and peaks.

The other question that always comes up in these discussions is whether measured response is the same as audible response. I really wish that they did graphs of AUDIBLE response, not some abstract sort of line that only represents what microphones and dummy heads can produce.
 
Also, there are two factors that affect the audibility of dips and peaks... the height/depth and the Q width. Averaging is meant to split the difference factoring in both. If you don't average, you need to take the Q into account when you look at the bumps.

 

[RRod]

The HD800 always gets flak for highlighting bad mastering, especially in the treble. Rather than "man, the mastering on this disc sure adds sibilance to the vocals" it's "gosh the HD800s are so sibilant!", even though such phenomenon are audible on other headphones when you focus through their recessed treble. Bright, I'd say no; unforgiving, certainly.

 

[Brooko]

 
The HD800 isn't a bright headphone, it's very neutral. The only way the HD800 sounds bright is if you compare it to dark headphones. 
 
I'd look elsewhere if you are looking for a bright headphone. 
 

 
Quote:

  No it's not. It's a bright headphone. Look at the FR graphs. 

 
Actually - I think it's also a question of subjectivity (including personal preference and anatomy), relative comparisons (what you're comparing it to), and also maybe headphone variation - as I've been reading about some of the variability of different HD800s over time.
 
If I was basing my thoughts on the HD800 I have in front of me now, comparing it to my T1, and forgetting the fact that I'm not particularly treble sensitive - then I'd agree with ubs28 that for me - the HD800 is more balanced than bright.
 
Speaking in absolutes without acknowledging our own particular bias (whether personal or environmental) ultimately helps no-one, especially not the OP.

 

[Brooko]

  Hi,
 
I wasn't sure which subforum to ask this, but I've wondered if the increased treble response of the HD800 would compensate for my diminished hearing towards the upper frequencies? A frequent criticism of the HD800 is that its treble can be relatively overly bright, but considering that high frequencies (i.e. > 6 kHz) need more dB to sound equally loud as mid-frequencies (i.e. 1kHz) to my ears, do my old ears alleviate this unwanted characteristic of the HD800?
 
And just out of curiosity, am I missing much from music by basically being deaf to frequencies above 10 kHz?

 
Thanks.

 
Hi laevi - not sure if this will help or not, but I can give you my own personal thoughts - from someone who's also older, but has a preference toward detail (some will say brighter headphones) 

. For reference, I have enjoyed in the past headphones like the SR325, K701, DT880 and T1 - so I'm not in the slightest treble sensitive.  I'm 47, have permanent mild tinnitus, and high freq for me roll-off dramatically above about 14 kHz.
 
I have an HD800 with me (SN257xx) at the moment, and for my preferences I'd describe it as well balanced, clear, and very clean sounding.  I'm primarily using it with an NFB-12 (dac section) and Little Dot MKIV OTL - many will say not the best of gear, but I'm loving it.  Overall, I'd call it less bright than the T1 I own.
 
It's definitely going to be brighter than your HD650s - but unlikely to be excessively so.
 
In another week, I'll have my take on a comparison between the HD800 and HD600 - which may or may not be helpful, but could provide a comparative reference at least.

 

[laevi]

Thanks for all the replies. I hope to hear the HD800 one day.
 
Brooko, I look forward to your comparison between the HD600 and HD800.

 

[lin0003]

I don't have older ears, but the HD800 is not that prominent in the treble IMO. It does sound a little on the bright side, but I would still call it rather neutral especially with cable, amp and DAC tunings.