I'm wondering about this.
Today I suddenly told myself that listening to the HD 650 actually sounded more enjoyable to my ears when compared to TOTL headphones.
Because the higher you go the tendency is for most (not all) gear to be technically better. That means less compromises.
The problem is that people have confusing name for everything (not just computer parts manufacturers who instead of just calling "High Gain" what it is goes with "eXtR3Me Pr0 G4MeR ULTIMATE PAWN4G3 Your Mum Was Fun" Mode). Like "Sound Signature," which doesn't immediately lay out why that is the sound signature, although of course it's an easier way to say it. What it really is is "what compromises our engineers can make for this price that Marketing bets and/or can work with to pitch to people." The more you spend, the fewer compromises would have to be made, hence the difference wouldn't be as drastic.
And then on the consumer side, some just subjectively prefer a lower range product. Then again, it's not like the above point is absolutely perfect in every application, so let's look at your HD650 vs the HD800. HD800 costs more, so less compromise, supposedly, and they got a much wider and deeper soundstage than the HD6xx series. But that's just for soundstage - overall despite the seemingly obvious imbalance the HD650 curve is relatively smoother. So in that case it's less of the HD800 being unequestionably superior overall, it's just absolutely superior in one aspect - imaging - but to some the treble peak would not be an acceptable trade off.
I believe that I'm starting to listen to my equipment more than my music collection.
It's a weird feeling that I can't seem to shake off.
Listening to the equipment is being so absorbed in what to change in the equipment, not simply in having different equipment (that may be due to use case, like a headphone or speaker reference system and then an IEM for portable) or even some overlaps (like having a Grado for casual, not full attention but still tapping your feet or subconsciously humming along listening, and then having a technically smoother response headphone with better imaging for when imaging and smoother sound matters more during dedicated listening sessions).
That said, all i have for the main headphone rig is an HD600, otherwise all my other gear are for different use cases (and yet sound similar enough that with a little EQ everything sounds similar in the end, albeit the cleaner, more lifelike sound on the HD600 with the desktop amp).
ISo, I've actually thought about 'downgrading' my system.
Thoughts?
You might find more people who downgraded in the speaker audio forums. Look for everyone who was already an audiophile before 2008, lost their house, moved into some apartment; some of them probably made their way here later.
I've done this to see if I was actually able to hear a difference between $100 amps/DACs and $$$$ amps/DACs, so I could really appreciate just how much I invested in headphone equipment. Well, YES, I can hear a difference. (or that's at least what my brain is telling me when considering physical differences in the products' appearance...
I tried to get DAC or even regress back to a CDP before but hilariously enough only the Arcam CD72 was better in every way vs the PCM2702 USB DAC section in my Cantate.2 (Other DACs use that chip only as a receiver chip; the Cantate's implementation is like a cheap USB soundcard's, ie receiver+DAC in one, but likely a better analogue output stage). Everything else either imaged the drums too far out in front (Cambridge CDPs and one of the DACMagics), NAD player just had slightly better bottom end and Marantz had a slightly nicer midrange, and then the Rega Saturn gave Norah Jones sinusitis. Decided to just save my money.
