[pp312]

Probably no other phone has stirred up such controversy as the 595. Some love them, some find them "boring" or just wrong. I've written recently that I prefer them to the 650 because the 650 (and other top end Senns I've heard, which is all of them) have too much energy in the upper midrange/lower treble area. Now I read the following on this "Headphonesguru" site http://www.headphonesguru.com/My_Hom...es/Page4.html:

"Frequency extend is very good, the channel matching is also satisfactory. Unfortunately their tonal balance is not entirely correct in both models. Especially the [higher] model HD595 has a recessed upper midrange (2-6 kHz) and produces a lifeless distant sound."

I fully agree. In fact it's the first time I've seen this pointed out on a "professional" site. Only difference is, I prefer that aberration. I LIKE that effect and find other Senn phones too lively and harsh.

Any thoughts?

 

[kool bubba ice]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pp312 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Probably no other phone has stirred up such controversy as the 595. Some love them, some find them "boring" or just wrong. I've written recently that I prefer them to the 650 because the 650 (and other top end Senns I've heard, which is all of them) have too much energy in the upper midrange/lower treble area. Now I read the following on this "Headphonesguru" site http://www.headphonesguru.com/My_Hom...es/Page4.html: "Frequency extend is very good, the channel matching is also satisfactory. Unfortunately their tonal balance is not entirely correct in both models. Especially the [higher] model HD595 has a recessed upper midrange (2-6 kHz) and produces a lifeless distant sound." I fully agree. In fact it's the first time I've seen this pointed out on a "professional" site. Only difference is, I prefer that aberration. I LIKE that effect and find other Senn phones too lively and harsh. Any thoughts?

The 595's are too upfront & shallow.. No real depth, once you get past heavy front end... I did prefer them to my 650's early on.. But when I started to upgrade my system, the 595's couldn't keep up with my 650's.. So I sold my 595's.. They are still good cans.. & I have fond memories of them..

 

[Alleyman]

This isnt new (to me atleast) ... HD595s frequency response mirrors your observation. I think it's because of Sennheiser's diffuse field equalization applied to their headphones.

 

[pp312]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kool bubba ice /img/forum/go_quote.gif I did prefer them to my 650's early on.. But when I started to upgrade my system, the 595's couldn't keep up with my 650's..

Ah, but what about those with neither the inclination nor wherewithal to upgrade, which in fact is most people? Aren't the 595s the perfect phone for them? As has been said before, it's not that the 595 does anything brilliantly, but that it has a finely judged mix of qualities at a reasonable price. Look past this forum and you'll see pretty much unalloyed praise for them all over the Web.

Anyone notice the HD565 review on that site? I owned a pair; I wish I still had them to try out after reading that.

 

[BassheadJazz]

I don't really know how many people buy the 595s as the "final solution" headphones anyway. I know there are better headphones out there, but really for the price, I think the 595s are some of the most versatile headphones out there and it helps that they work so well without needing a powerhouse set-up. When I upgrade my home system, I'll undoubtedly be looking into upper echelon headphones, but beyond that, they work just fine. I never got why so many people hate on these headphones.

 

[donunus]

at first they seem blah to the snap, crackle, and pop crowd or maybe lets call them the boom and sizzle crowd. They are pretty decent cans for the price