[markot86]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bLue_oNioN I'm glad you elaborated on your statement because given your midbass hump explanation, I think our difference in opinion hinges more on our respective definitions of "more bass" than anything else. So instead of trying to quantify exactly what constitutes "more bass" I will shift over to qualitative terms -- I've personally found the 600 to be more balanced, and the 650 to have a darker, warmer feel; not sure if you might agree with that? P.S. I would appreciate it if you edited your post so that the second half of your response showed exactly who you are replying to. Right now, it looks as if you were replying to a continuation of my post, when in actuality, it was written by someone else. Thanks!

Sorry, I was rushing and I didn't have the time to do that =D

Believe it or not, I found the HD600's to be darker than the HD650's, mostly because of the midrange. The 650's have a midrange that draws you into the music and is crystal clear, whereas the 600's midrange was slightly withdrawn sounding and murky at times.

Interestingly enough, I've never really heard the lack of highs on the 650's or the 600's. Maybe there is a tiny, tiny difference between the two, but I feel like this forum overdoes the differences. Difference in highs between the sr-60 and the hd650? Big. Differences in the highs between the HD600, HD650, and somewhat so the DT880? small.

Where IMO the 650 REALLY stands out from the 600 is bass quality and quantity, and this is where I seem to clash majorly with everyone. To my ears, the 600's had more bass. I've tried to justify it because of the midbass hump, and that's really the only justification I have. For some reason, in my system, the HD650's have less bass, period.

While I do agree with you that the 600's are more balanced in the true sense of the word (mids, highs, and lows), The 650's give me a sense of actually being at an event as opposed to the 600's, which just sound like great speakers. Not that there's anything wrong with a great speaker sound, but the 650's really hit the spot when it comes down to my sonic tastes.

In all honesty, I really wish I found the 600's more neutral and better, because it would save me quite a nice chunk of money. However, to my ears, and in my system, the 650's are more neutral sounding. Notice however that I said in my system; ymmv. I'm probably suffering from major fanboyism, but I've never had a headphone impress me this much (except for perhaps the HD600) for longer than 2 weeks; now that it's still impressing me majorly even after a month and a half, I feel like it should deserve some praise considering the ammount of bashing it's getting lately.

My impressions are also done with stock cables; perhaps one day I'll pick up an HD600 w/ cardas and see what all the fuss is about, but until them I'll be enjoying the 650's.

 

[robm321]

You make some good points on why you like the 650 and enjoy them.

I get completely different results (pretty much the opposite) than you, but you may have a set up that works with the 650's better than the 600's.

I just wanted to point out that if you compare them with stock cables, then the 650 has an advantage in that the stock cable on it is much better than the stock cable on the 600. Also, the Cardas on the 600 doens't improve it slightly, it really transforms the 600 (I'd say it's really necessary). Or others aftermarket cables.

But all that being said, I think you like the detail, etc. the 650 offers, so I'm glad that you enjoy them. We all just discuss stuff here, but in the end, I'm glad you are getting so much joy out of your 650's!

 

[markot86]

Quote:

Originally Posted by robm321 You make some good points on why you like the 650 and enjoy them. I get completely different results (pretty much the opposite) than you, but you may have a set up that works with the 650's better than the 600's. I just wanted to point out that if you compare them with stock cables, then the 650 has an advantage in that the stock cable on it is much better than the stock cable on the 600. Also, the Cardas on the 600 doens't improve it slightly, it really transforms the 600 (I'd say it's really necessary). Or others aftermarket cables. But all that being said, I think you like the detail, etc. the 650 offers, so I'm glad that you enjoy them. We all just discuss stuff here, but in the end, I'm glad you are getting so much joy out of your 650's!

Again, the cable could really be the issue; the cable of the 600's looked like complete crud, so I have no doubt that cardas fixes it.

 

[sgrossklass]

Let me speculate on the background for the perceived differences a bit...
First, let's grab the frequency responses of both HD600 and HD650:
http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCom...are+Headphones
"Good speakers" (600) vs. "live" (650): I bet it's the highs that are mainly responsible for this. For one, the "anti-fatigue dip" on the 600 is both deeper and extends further up, to be followed by a peak slightly above 8 kHz. On the '650, the whole mid and upper treble from about 6 to 14 kHz appears to be much flatter and in line with the generally declining response - hats off to engineering. (The overall amount should be similar, and differences hardly ever exceed +/- 4dB, so with our hearing and built-in EQ there won't be any outright huge subjective sonic differences except for those caused by masking.)
The '650 also gives a more prominent low midrange (up to about 1 kHz or so), which should add to the perception of ambience.
As for the mids, hmm, the '650 features a response very close to the Orpheus (actually 'Oprheus', since apparently noone ever bothered to fix the tpyo

) in the important 1.2 kHz to 3.5 kHz range, with the range around 1.8 kHz taken back by about 2 dB vs. the '600, so that might give a touch more "blackness". I'm under the impression that you still perceive some lower highs as part of the mids, so the improved response shortly above 6 kHz may also play a role here.
Now the bass issue... the Headroom writeup mentions improved damping so possibly it may actually be more a question of boominess than amount of bass. Also, if a slight notch in the upper bass / low mids can increase the perceived amount of bass, maybe the contrary is the case here. Besides, one never knows about sample-to-sample variation.

 

[huberd]

It's not better it's just different. Imho I thought that the HD600s were unrefined and their highs were a bit harsh. They don't have that signature veil the HD650s are known for, idk I prefer the smoother overall performance of the HD650 to the HD600s "natural" sound. If the sound that the HD600 produces is natural than I would rather have something unnatural or "colored". In response to the part where the reviewer says you need to train your ear to hear everything I think that bit is a bit of rubbish, no offense to whoever wrote that but analyzing is analyzing, listening for enjoyment is another thing. If I wanted something to analyze music with I would just go with the Sony SA5000 since the detail on it is incredible but for daily use and relaxing the Sonys would give me a migraine within an hour, the Sennheisers I can listen to and enjoy all day long. Don't get me wrong the HD600s are still great cans but personally I just prefer the liquid smoothness of the HD650, it's kind of like comparing Bacardi to Jack Daniels, they both are pretty tasty but the Jack will have you on your ass within the hour whereas the Bacardi will just have you drinkin' more and more until you pass out

.

 

[huberd]

I would have to disagree, headphones are all about replicating the way a live performance sounds. I have listened to both headphones and the HD-650 is the same as being in a live performance with ear warmers on. No one can say that the HD-650 sounds natural and if anyone hears harshness in the HD-600 they must have colored cables or equipment that's making the headphone sound harsh. They don't sound harsh in any way and actually sound very smooth and realistic. The HD-650 sounds to me as if I had two midbass drivers with a spike in the midrange a nothing else. The last time is tried them I took them off after about two minutes and said. I don't want to listen to this anymore. Actually, I haven't found another headphone that has such a boring sound signature. They remind me of listening to an AM radio of the past.

 

[CoryGillmore]

12 years tho...

 

[bagwell359]

A vote for the HD600 over the HD650.

1. Mids are more pure on 600, voicing is exceptional.
2. Mid-bass, upper bass, and lower mids are humped up, and thicker/veiled on 650's
3. Mid treble up recessed on 650
4. 600 isn't perfect - it has some bite 3-5kHz that's not ideal
5. 600 has got some damped bass under 70 Hz but no grunt - makes it sound light overall.

 

[serman005]

I have owned both for awhile. I like both (listening to HD650/Pat Metheny as I speak). Mostly, I find the bass presentation different and do not especially prefer one over the other in that regard. I do find the 650 more lively overall in its presentation and have absolutely no ideea why that would be for me. Someone smarter may be able to offer some data rationale for this perceived liveliness, but it is definitely a major departure from the more tame HD600. That's my take.

 

[Tsukuyomi]

I've had the opportunity to try the 600, 650, 660S. and i can say im not a huge fan of the senn sound signature of all 3 of those.
That being said, i can respect and understand why some people like it.
to me however, i do find the 660 a better sounding headphone out of the group. it just sounds like it has better separation between tones and instruments.
i found the 600 thin and a bit boring. and the 650 was better than the 600, but by not a whole lot. the 650 was slightly more bass elevated than the 600.

as for build quality, i didnt like any of them. i thought they all used cheap, creaky, brittle plastic and the pads+headband cushion were lacking in comfort.
I do however like the cables for the 660 however. 4.4 is a nice touch.

in terms of looks, i kinda like the speckled look of the 600. its unique and different. the 650s look boring, and the 660S look nice but a bit too common since almost everything now a days is "stealth/black/matt/dark tone".

I used my own music as follows:
Muse Simulation Theory album in FLAC 16/44.1
Sam Smith The Thrill of It All album in FLAC 16/44.1
The Fifth Element Soundtrack Album by Éric Serra in FLAC 16/44.1
Amon Amarth Twilight of the Thunder God in FLAC 16/44.1
In This Moment Ritual album in FLAC 16/44.1
Michael Jackson The Essential Album in FLAC 24/96
David Bowie Blackstar Album in FLAC 24/96

all these albums were on my MicroSD card played from my Astell&Kern SR15 DAP to test a DAPs performance. then i played the same albums and songs exactly on my desktop PC with my RME ADI-2 DAC.
From that experience ive made this conclusion. I'd be interested to know if anyone else feels similar to me or if people would like to discuss

PS: totally forgot to mention, based on what i tried i think the 660 are probably the best over all despite some things that ive mentioned. you're better off either buying new or used a pair of 660S. if i ever require a sennheiser headphone i'll probably end up with the 660S since the 800S and 820 are way too expensive.

 

[Richtofen]

I've had the opportunity to try the 600, 650, 660S. and i can say im not a huge fan of the senn sound signature of all 3 of those.
That being said, i can respect and understand why some people like it.
to me however, i do find the 660 a better sounding headphone out of the group. it just sounds like it has better separation between tones and instruments.
i found the 600 thin and a bit boring. and the 650 was better than the 600, but by not a whole lot. the 650 was slightly more bass elevated than the 600.

as for build quality, i didnt like any of them. i thought they all used cheap, creaky, brittle plastic and the pads+headband cushion were lacking in comfort.
I do however like the cables for the 660 however. 4.4 is a nice touch.

in terms of looks, i kinda like the speckled look of the 600. its unique and different. the 650s look boring, and the 660S look nice but a bit too common since almost everything now a days is "stealth/black/matt/dark tone".

I used my own music as follows:
Muse Simulation Theory album in FLAC 16/44.1
Sam Smith The Thrill of It All album in FLAC 16/44.1
The Fifth Element Soundtrack Album by Éric Serra in FLAC 16/44.1
Amon Amarth Twilight of the Thunder God in FLAC 16/44.1
In This Moment Ritual album in FLAC 16/44.1
Michael Jackson The Essential Album in FLAC 24/96
David Bowie Blackstar Album in FLAC 24/96

all these albums were on my MicroSD card played from my Astell&Kern SR15 DAP to test a DAPs performance. then i played the same albums and songs exactly on my desktop PC with my RME ADI-2 DAC.
From that experience ive made this conclusion. I'd be interested to know if anyone else feels similar to me or if people would like to discuss

PS: totally forgot to mention, based on what i tried i think the 660 are probably the best over all despite some things that ive mentioned. you're better off either buying new or used a pair of 660S. if i ever require a sennheiser headphone i'll probably end up with the 660S since the 800S and 820 are way too expensive.

if you tried those recently 600 and 650 have both changed quite a lot over the years, so just keep in mind these guys in 2006 at the start of this thread probably had different sounding cans

 

[Richtofen]

I've had the opportunity to try the 600, 650, 660S. and i can say im not a huge fan of the senn sound signature of all 3 of those.
That being said, i can respect and understand why some people like it.
to me however, i do find the 660 a better sounding headphone out of the group. it just sounds like it has better separation between tones and instruments.
i found the 600 thin and a bit boring. and the 650 was better than the 600, but by not a whole lot. the 650 was slightly more bass elevated than the 600.

as for build quality, i didnt like any of them. i thought they all used cheap, creaky, brittle plastic and the pads+headband cushion were lacking in comfort.
I do however like the cables for the 660 however. 4.4 is a nice touch.

in terms of looks, i kinda like the speckled look of the 600. its unique and different. the 650s look boring, and the 660S look nice but a bit too common since almost everything now a days is "stealth/black/matt/dark tone".

I used my own music as follows:
Muse Simulation Theory album in FLAC 16/44.1
Sam Smith The Thrill of It All album in FLAC 16/44.1
The Fifth Element Soundtrack Album by Éric Serra in FLAC 16/44.1
Amon Amarth Twilight of the Thunder God in FLAC 16/44.1
In This Moment Ritual album in FLAC 16/44.1
Michael Jackson The Essential Album in FLAC 24/96
David Bowie Blackstar Album in FLAC 24/96

all these albums were on my MicroSD card played from my Astell&Kern SR15 DAP to test a DAPs performance. then i played the same albums and songs exactly on my desktop PC with my RME ADI-2 DAC.
From that experience ive made this conclusion. I'd be interested to know if anyone else feels similar to me or if people would like to discuss

PS: totally forgot to mention, based on what i tried i think the 660 are probably the best over all despite some things that ive mentioned. you're better off either buying new or used a pair of 660S. if i ever require a sennheiser headphone i'll probably end up with the 660S since the 800S and 820 are way too expensive.

as for your impressions, their build might seem cheap nowadays in a world where everything is fake premium, but they're built to last. Absolute tanks. The new surface headphones or any other fashion can might feel more premium but they'll break way before a 600. I'd also reccomend used 800 for 6-800 over 660s, it's not that much more to save up. RME is great though, good choice

 

[Tsukuyomi]

as for your impressions, their build might seem cheap nowadays in a world where everything is fake premium, but they're built to last. Absolute tanks. The new surface headphones or any other fashion can might feel more premium but they'll break way before a 600. I'd also reccomend used 800 for 6-800 over 660s, it's not that much more to save up. RME is great though, good choice

in fairness, the 600 and 650 that i tried where not recently made, they were bought maybe quite a few years ago. also since sennheiser is stopping production on the 600 and 650 im sure that their sound signature will stay the way it is now or ware away over time as most things with moving parts do.

as for premium build, many "premium" headphones are built better in my opinion. i noticed lots of creaking from the plastic frame on the 600 and 650(less on the 650) and almost none at all on the 660S. i've had Th900mk2, i have DT1990 Pro and B&O H6(2ndGen) and these cans are built with metal, leather, wood and in small measure plastic. but mostly metal. in my opinion if you're going to pay over 300$ on a can, there should be as little as plastic as possible and only used when necessary. when i do look at cans i tend to also inspect the build. my next cans will be either the Focal Elegia or Audeze LCD2C Classics. granted the focal is like sennheiser in build when it comes to plastic usage. but the audeze is mostly metal and leather. and for that price im hoping the build is substantial.

I've tried the 800, the reason i didnt mention it is because i felt it was a bit lacking in something. i couldnt put my finger on it. it felt lacking in a way. when i tried the 800S it sounded a tiny bit better (maybe its marketing bs or not) but i did notice a little more extension in the lows. by contrast i've never tried the 820. ive only seen them once at a store and they were behind a glass display. when i asked to demo them the guy said he was unable to do that as they werent for demo use.