[Geek]

I find that "veiled" means having a very relaxed upper midrange, the effect of which extends into the high end as well. Some people would say the HD-600's "Veil" sounds like listening to music behind a door, others say it makes the music less fatiguing and more natural.

As Hirsch stated, the veil disappears when the 600s are driven by a monster amp.

Cheers,
Geek

 

[AC1]

Quote:

Originally posted by Geek I find that "veiled" means having a very relaxed upper midrange, the effect of which extends into the high end as well. Some people would say the HD-600's "Veil" sounds like listening to music behind a door, others say it makes the music less fatiguing and more natural.

Yes, I would agree that it is the basis for the "veil" that the 600s exhibit, is the softness it has in those regions... Also, it has a weighty low end/lower mid that that is a bit too full and not the most focused which can easily obscure detail overall if not dealt with properly.
In contrast, the stax nova classic system has pretty much the exact opposite characteristics... It lacks the mid low/low end detail/dynamics but actually has a more energetic/detailed upper midrange/ high end.

 

[TWIFOSP]

Geek,

Don't get me wrong, I love listening to live music too.

I'd take it over listening to headphones anyday.

The best thing I've found to do is listen to the same music through different cans. The more you do that, the more you start to realize none of them sound like a live performance anyway. Each emphasizes different parts of the recording.

I've listened to a live performance that was recorded. Then listened to the same performance with headphones (hd600) and I liked it better with the headphones. Live performance = energy? Shrug. The best is playing an instrument IN the performance, but sadly I don't do that anymore

Now that I've successfully hijacked part of this thread, I'll give some of my observations.

The veil gives as much as it takes away. Your ear can only hear so many frequencies at once. I would think that is why people tend to like neutral cans, they are "everything"...? But when you compare them to a pair of brighter headphones, suddenly you hear it differently and it is new. So the veil seems like it was a bad thing.

I'm guilty of this myself. I've switched headphones recently and decided my hd600s sounded more muddy. After listening a while to my new headphones, switch back to the hd600s and its not "muddy" just different.

Cheers.

 

[immtbiker]

I have found, comparing my ATH W100's to my HD600's that the bass is deeper, but more "muddled", on the 100's, and the highs are brighter and cleaner on the 600's. I use trio or quartet jazz music to compare, usually with a sax or trumpet involved. The cymbals and snare are good high testers and the standup bass, is a good low tester. There are recordings, that I don't hear the light tap of the brush on the high hat with the W100's, that I do on the 600's. Is that to say that the HD600's are more colored, even though the sound is truly happening in the recording and the 100's are not reproducing them? Or would one say, with the missing highs and the "muddled bass, that the 100's are more veiled?

 

[TWIFOSP]

Having not heard the w100s myself, I couldn't say. But to me, it sounds like you are describing the properties of a "warmer" headphone opposed to "veil".

 

[Beagle]

Quote:

Originally posted by Geek As Hirsch stated, the veil disappears when the 600s are driven by a monster amp

Or a brighter amp that fills in what the HD600 lacks? This must also be considered. You should enjoy the designed character of a headphone through a neutral amp. I like a 'characterless' amp because it tells you what is what regarding the headphone.

What you have to consider with the HD600 is it's lack of resonances, which some find odd when they don't hear them, and they think something is missing. Sometimes the excitement that headphones create is only unwanted resonance, which some find appealing. This is why some find accuracy boring. But what is accuracy? Nobody will ever really know. If everything sounds great, something is wrong. If something sounds wrong, we change headphones and amps. We can't change what already exists on recordings. Since the HD600 is so overanalyzed and opinions vary so much, we must look to our recordings. Here is where the 'brightness' and 'veiling' may actually be present. A better source might be the recording of a voice you are familiar with, like a friend or spouse. Whatever reproduces that most 'accurately' probably is most accurate at reproducing what's on your recordings.

 

[gerG]

Beagle, your observation of controlled resonances is spot on. One of the most impressive things about the Sens, for me, is the lack of peaks and valleys in the response. These things have been very well engineered. Maybe too well. The bass is so damped that it goes away too early.

On the subject of the veil (or the sleeve, as some of us know it

) I have found that about 3-5db of boost at 6khz and above makes it vanish. I have heard the sleeve with every amp/cable combo that I have available to me. Could be my old ears, but my new test mic seems to agree. To me the effect is much like an overly attenuated tweeter. The detail is still there, but the treble is out of whack with the midrange, and cymbals lose their sparkle.


gerG

 

[RVD]

On some amps I can hear the veil on the HD600's and others I don't. To me the veil is caused by the sloppy bass that can be overpowering on certain amps causing the recessed vocals and also masks detail. Also I think the rolled off highs contributes too which I think can be greatly helped by different amps, but never fully goes away. Still I would rather have a little roll off on the highs rather then bright or harsh highs.

Something I have never really understood about the HD600's is how people describe them as if they feel they are sitting like 10 rows back or "laid back". With the HD600, or any other headphone, I have always felt like I was on the stage I never felt like I was in the audience.

 

[Beagle]

Here's a test you can do to determine what effect the enclosure has on the sound....

Put the headphones on, unplugged, and listen to white noise or FM tuner hiss through the loudspeakers. Listen with the phones on your head then take them off. Note the differences in the tone of the hiss. This will give you an indication of what kinds of colorations or resonances the headphones have on the music you listen to through them.

Or you can just tap the enclosures with your fingers and hear what sound the resonance has. Is it alive or dead? Where does it fit in the frequency range?

 

[Dusty Chalk]

Quote:

Originally posted by Beagle Or a brighter amp that fills in what the HD600 lacks?

I would disagree with this. "Brighter" != "more detailed" ( which does equal "less veiled"). No, it just seems that when you give the HD600 power, it responds more correctly. Perhaps it's frequency-based impedance curve is a factor. Has this ever been measured? JA always measures the frequency response of the impedance when he measures speakers. Amps that can handle more variance tend to be flatter on headphones that vary more.

 

[elnero]

But aren't alot of high end headphone amps, like Headrooms, designed with the HD600 in mind or at least as one of the (few)references in the case of other manufacturers? If so, then it stands to reason that amps like Headrooms would compensate for variations in the HD600's frequency response. This would also give the 580/600's a distinct advantage on many amps. I could very well be wrong on this. This was just an impression I got from reading some threads. I thought it pretty much explained why some amps worked so well with them while others didn't.

 

[PeterR]

Quote:

Originally posted by Dusty Chalk Perhaps it's frequency-based impedance curve is a factor. Has this ever been measured?

Below is a graph from Headroom, showing the impedance curve for a HD600 vs. a Grado RS-1

 

[swalker]

Quote:

amps like Headrooms would compensate for variations in the HD600's frequency response.

I always get confused about amps and stuff. I remember reading people refer RS1 over HD600 with blockhead and if that's the case.. RS1 and HD600 are similar in frequency response? Or there's something magical in the current of blockhead that makes both sound wonderful?

 

[STSinNYC]

My HD580s with Cardas replacement, META42 amp seem to me to produce very smooth, detailed, "natural" classical music sound. Last night I listened repeatedly to the same passage in Vivaldi's Magnificat with two different phones. The 580s gave a pure, refined sound with a wide soundstage. Nice detail. My new Alessandro MS-1s were brighter, a bit more detailed in the way you get when treble is enhanced by an equalizer. Depth was a little less as was the soundstage. Both phones gave beautiful sound, just different.

I have noticed that the recording quality on some of our classical CDs is not as good as I had thought. Production values seem to be higher on some recent rock albums and some remasters. I'm curious if Hrisch and anyone else has had a similar experience.

 

[PeterR]

Quote:

Originally posted by elnero If so, then it stands to reason that amps like Headrooms would compensate for variations in the HD600's frequency response. This would also give the 580/600's a distinct advantage on many amps. I could very well be wrong on this.

Here are the Blockhead measurements from Stereophile:
http://www.stereophile.com/showarchives.cgi?614:6
While the the Blockhead offers EQ and crossfeed functions, its basic frequency response is quite flat (fig.3).