[tamleo]

Can anyone give me more hd800 vs hd800s comparison please?

 

[bagwell359]

To me, the 800 bass is better. In order to squeeze a few Hz out od the S, they raised the Q from near ideal, to higher, which means that its not as controlled. Something like the Wilson remaster of Yes's "Fragile" will show that the bass and drums smear details more on the S.

It so happens that I like the HD-600/800 on OTL tubes much better than SS amps, due mostly to fleshing out the harmonics from bare/spare to rich AND quite accurate. The bass gets a bit more elevated and you can get more low bass out of them as well. But the S is heard as underdamped, and that has been my main complaint on tube amps for decades - along with retubing costs, and overly polite treble over 12k (not on all,just most amps I have heard).

 

[bagwell359]

wow thanks! sounds like I need to try an Arya v2 for myself then! I totally understand when you talk about the instruments sounding small in the HD800, having a grander overall presentation sounds like a blast actually. I'm going to keep this as a very interesting option indeed. thank you so much

Arya 2 does have a technicolor soundstage. Much like a very large Maggie like the 20, or a Martin-Logan CLS IIz. But the image is taller vs the sides than the recording, and the tuning in the mid treble doesn't work for me. But it is impressive. However, these days one can probably find a HEK v2 used for about $1250 which is just better overall.

 

[tamleo]

To me, the 800 bass is better. In order to squeeze a few Hz out od the S, they raised the Q from near ideal, to higher, which means that its not as controlled. Something like the Wilson remaster of Yes's "Fragile" will show that the bass and drums smear details more on the S.

It so happens that I like the HD-600/800 on OTL tubes much better than SS amps, due mostly to fleshing out the harmonics from bare/spare to rich AND quite accurate. The bass gets a bit more elevated and you can get more low bass out of them as well. But the S is heard as underdamped, and that has been my main complaint on tube amps for decades - along with retubing costs, and overly polite treble over 12k (not on all,just most amps I have heard).

I swear I was reading your comment about the HD800 vs the HD800S on the HD660s2 thread then I saw the notification of this thread lol That was when I was searching for the HD800S2 arrival out of my nervosa
May I ask what is the Q you mentioned? Tks

 

[bagwell359]

I swear I was reading your comment about the HD800 vs the HD800S on the HD660s2 thread then I saw the notification of this thread lol That was when I was searching for the HD800S2 arrival out of my nervosa
May I ask what is the Q you mentioned? Tks

Q is a technical term for the behavior of the magnet and suspension in a woofer to control cone oscillation and resonant frequency (hopefully tuned by the designer). Closed box Q is what is the most predictable. Baffleless, or partial baffle speakers like open or partially open headphones are difficult to model, but it is a key factor none the less. In a closed (acoustic suspension box) there is a Q, resonance point, and lots more. With a port or ports in the box (hopefully tuned) there are two or more resonance points. The ideal bass in a closed box is expressed as .707. The Large Walnut Advent was about .9. The little known Cizek 1 had a switch to go from a Q of .7 to .5. .5 is very dry and damped. I built 5 different subs back in the 80's, and did have the two named speakers and many more. It's really not crucial to know all this, but it is handy to know what your bass references should sound like, so you can judge for yourself when evaluating gear. I really like estats but can't afford them these days. I have several planars and have done work on the tuning via mods and EQ. But its by ear because actually testing these factors requires equipment that I don't have,

There is so little distance, space for damping, etc. involved in headphones, that many closed backs have Q's well above .707. With a single instrument in the bass range some bass cannon type cans are quite impressive. But add multiple instruments in the bass range playing similar but not exact notes and time signatures, and many of them are exposed as dreck because they simply cannot react quickly enough (to start and stop quickly). Estats move the least air so can come back to rest the quickest, but don't really pound out the bass. Planars are quick on the initial rise time, but often struggle to stop quickly. some dynamics like the 800 have well damped bass, but just don't go low. The S goes lower and louder, but thats because the tuning was changed and it won't track super complex bass as well. Physics tends to be hard to cheat.

Just to make the point on FR graphs and EQ settings. They are important, but, Q, reflections, CSD, cancellations, reaction to pulse tones up and down the spectrum, and double and triple tones to test IM, and a pile more impact the sound. The FR and EQ can represent a starting point, but its hardly the sum total.

EDIT ADD: It is my experience that mutli-variable situations do not yield a complete solution with just a one variable change.

 

[tamleo]

Q is a technical term for the behavior of the magnet and suspension in a woofer to control cone oscillation and resonant frequency (hopefully tuned by the designer). Closed box Q is what is the most predictable. Baffleless, or partial baffle speakers like open or partially open headphones are difficult to model, but it is a key factor none the less. In a closed (acoustic suspension box) there is a Q, resonance point, and lots more. With a port or ports in the box (hopefully tuned) there are two or more resonance points. The ideal bass in a closed box is expressed as .707. The Large Walnut Advent was about .9. The little known Cizek 1 had a switch to go from a Q of .7 to .5. .5 is very dry and damped. I built 5 different subs back in the 80's, and did have the two named speakers and many more. It's really not crucial to know all this, but it is handy to know what your bass references should sound like, so you can judge for yourself when evaluating gear. I really like estats but can't afford them these days. I have several planars and have done work on the tuning via mods and EQ. But its by ear because actually testing these factors requires equipment that I don't have,

There is so little distance, space for damping, etc. involved in headphones, that many closed backs have Q's well above .707. With a single instrument in the bass range some bass cannon type cans are quite impressive. But add multiple instruments in the bass range playing similar but not exact notes and time signatures, and many of them are exposed as dreck because they simply cannot react quickly enough (to start and stop quickly). Estats move the least air so can come back to rest the quickest, but don't really pound out the bass. Planars are quick on the initial rise time, but often struggle to stop quickly. some dynamics like the 800 have well damped bass, but just don't go low. The S goes lower and louder, but thats because the tuning was changed and it won't track super complex bass as well. Physics tends to be hard to cheat.

Just to make the point on FR graphs and EQ settings. They are important, but, Q, reflections, CSD, cancellations, reaction to pulse tones up and down the spectrum, and double and triple tones to test IM, and a pile more impact the sound. The FR and EQ can represent a starting point, but its hardly the sum total.

Thank you. Your knowledge is so good, I really appreciate reading it. May I ask if you modded your HD800? I also think my HD800S is polite at high-treble area but the low-treble sometimes still makes me irritating. I also made my HD650 less damped by taking out the foams behind its drivers (kiss mod) and I much preferred it to the stock form. But after getting my HD800S I cannot comeback to my all other headphones, I can listen to my HD800S all day. I am also a little frustrated now because I have wasted so much time and money for not buying the HD800s in the 2012 when I bought my first hi-end headphone. Many reviewed the HD800s as bright, unmusical blabla..

 

[bagwell359]

Thank you. Your knowledge is so good, I really appreciate reading it. May I ask if you modded your HD800? I also think my HD800S is polite at high-treble area but the low-treble sometimes still makes me irritating. I also made my HD650 less damped by taking out the foams behind its drivers (kiss mod) and I much preferred it to the stock form. But after getting my HD800S I cannot comeback to my all other headphones, I can listen to my HD800S all day. I am also a little frustrated now because I have wasted so much time and money for not buying the HD800s in the 2012 when I bought my first hi-end headphone. Many reviewed the HD800s as bright, unmusical blabla..

Don't have the 800 or 800S - but borrowed a few times. 800 or S do need EQ, and the 800 needs that mod which I forget the name of. The timbre of the 600 is still better than the 650 or 800 IMO, even with EQ.

Debating if I should get more cans. My tastes well exceed my likely budget over the next few years. A great speaker seems to be more likely. But if I do get a can a new 800S is among the most likely, because I don't have a real good image can.

Added: Of course the cultists could be right about the NDH-30. All I know is the NDH-20 is very much not my cup of tea.

 

[Andrew_WOT]

Sennheiser as high end headphones manufacturer is in a rear view mirror, outpassed by all new competitors.
Same can be said about Shure for IEMs.

 

[tamleo]

Sennheiser as high end headphones manufacturer is in a rear view mirror, outpassed by all new competitors.
Same can be said about Shure for IEMs.

With a specific area, of course. But when it comes to all-round headphones, I am sure Sennheiser still has a good stand slot in audio headphone market

 

[bombadilio]

Odd question have you ever played any video games on a pc with these headphones? I was thinking of getting them for my computer work and adding an antilon modmic. Would love any input!

 

[nieveulv]

Sennheiser as high end headphones manufacturer is in a rear view mirror, outpassed by all new competitors.
Same can be said about Shure for IEMs.

I think you forgot about the he-1 and the legendary he-90

 

[Audiophiliac]

I got my original 800's in 2007, and lived with my own EQ bass boost, for a while. Then I got Sonarworks Referece EQ software that corrects them using a measured tone sweep recorded by mic's in a dummy head's ears, to perfection. Now, after having upgraded every part of my chain except the usb port on the pc, (don't plug any part into a cheap power bar, even the pc, which likes a better cable a lot, also), my sound is seriously refined. I'm just waiting for 192kbps to further improve what 96kbps just got started fixing. Too bad most stuff has still only been 44.1. Once higher resolution is normal, going back to 44.1 will be a burn.

Odd question have you ever played any video games on a pc with these headphones? I was thinking of getting them for my computer work and adding an antilon modmic. Would love any input!

Video games are getting the same fine treatment as music, however I don't find game SQ to be nearly as important as music then movies. Headphones for sure for them, though. My sweet setup definitely doesn't hurt games.

 

[MilitaryHifi]

Pre-ordered the 8xx, expecting a better tuned 800s. Sold off my old in the tooth 800s before value plummeted. Receieved my 8xx instantly regretted selling my 800s. It's sound was a far departure from 800s sound. Sounds muffled, like there was a veil over the music. Kept it hung up not using it, until someone came out with the sticker mod. Took off all the stickers of the 8xx. Went to loving the 8xx and not needing to get the 800s again.

Just wanted to share my experience. Never got the chance to compare the two side by side.

 

[UntilThen]

I'm still happy with my HD800 original with ZMF pads. With my quad of tube amps, it sounds crazy good.

 

[Lvivske]

One of the defining Features of the HD800S that sold a lot of people was the added Bass and warmth. I can confirm the HD800S is bass heavy, in fact it had too much bass presence in some of my more delicate tracks, causing a loss of focus on the main instruments. the OG HD800 fix this for me perfectly. Not only is the bass more laid back, there is also LESS DISTORTION in the bass

As much as I love my OG 800s, I always dip back into reading reviews and questioning if I should get the 800Ss. Some people say there's barely a difference, while above here OP says they are "bass heavy" while the OGs are fine.

The 800 has no bass at all. It's horrible for bass. Unlistenable. I fix it with EQ....sometimes lots of EQ depending on the amp....and I love the end result, but how are people getting by fine to the point they think the bass can be good to strong? I'm so at a loss here.