[Bilavideo]

For years, the HD600 was Sennheiser's top can - and not because Sennies are stupid. Their original MSRP was $519. Today, you can pick up a pair - new for under $300 and used for around $200. What has changed? The product line. When Sennheiser replaced the 600 with the 650, it caused a rift within the Senn community, a rift between 600 loyalists and 650 upgraders. The general argument from the loyalists was that the 650 wasn't "better," just "different." That particular Jan-n-Marcia fight has been obscured, to some degree, by the release of the 800, with its revolutionary new driver and its $1,400 price tag.

With the release of behemoths like the T1, the PS1000, the Ed9 and the HD800 - you lose bragging rights (if you don't own the newest gear) but you gain some terrific deals. Who would have thought, back when the 600 ruled the roost, that you could snap it up for 60% off?

If you're listening to the 600 and it lacks bass, one of two things is happening. Either you are expecting more of a colored presentation (because you're a basshead and you don't know it) or you're not properly amping the unit. Without full amplification, you're going to get anemic bass. Ironically, with the 650, it runs a bit the other way. If you don't have enough juice, the 650 sounds "veiled." It's not the headphone so much as what you're feeding it. If you like a very bassy presentation, you'll want at least the 650 if not something else entirely. If, on the other hand, you're saying that the 600 is just tinny and light, you're not listening to one. It's like talking smack about Superman after he's had a kryptonite salad.

 

[R300]

When amped properly, the hd600 has controlled and very deep bass - but you lave to listen for it, even with a good amp. With the 600s, bass complements the music without overpowering it. It's not like some phones that imediately blow your mind with their bass, but become tiring to listen too.

The one downside is that the bass lacks that dynamic bass "slam" you get with Grados and certain speakers.

 

[Mato]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bilavideo /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you're listening to the 600 and it lacks bass, one of two things is happening. Either you are expecting more of a colored presentation (because you're a basshead and you don't know it) or you're not properly amping the unit.

Definitely the latter and probably the former. I don't know if it's that i'm a 'basshead' - just that because i've never experience mid-fi headphones or above before, i like things coloured?

As I say, I love my Quads - are they that coloured to make the HD600 seem like a shock?

 

[aimlink]

Quote:

Originally Posted by R300 /img/forum/go_quote.gif When amped properly, the hd600 has controlled and very deep bass - but you lave to listen for it, even with a good amp. With the 600s, bass complements the music without overpowering it. It's not like some phones that imediately blow your mind with their bass, but become tiring to listen too.

Words very well written and which describe my own impressions exactly.

 

[shane55]

My HD600's were my favorite HP's and I enjoyed the sound they produced.
They are, when amped properly, (as many have pointed out) lush and rich and wonderful to listen to. They put out a beautiful sound that is engaging and very compelling.

I had initially two issues with them:
1) The hard clamping on the noggin. This eased-up and I actually liked the fit.
2) They lacked the upper end that I required in my listening.

The third issue I wound up having with them after they broke-in is that they were actually somewhat tonally coloured. Not as much as other cans I've heard, but definitely skewed towards the warm side of things.

I didn't realize this last one (or how much I missed #2) until I began to listen a set of cans that were very open, revealing, crisp and incomparably neutral, and unfortunately they showed the weaknesses in the HD600.

The somewhat restricted soundstage, is really not a negative or an issue to me.

On certain types of music, the lack of upper end was not an issue either and these cans really excelled. On other types of music however, what was missing was what I am keyed into and missed... the 'air' didn't exist.

On acoustic music they KILLED in one respect! They can produce the warm, rich resonant sonorous texture of a 1035 Martin guitar body beautifully. The HD600 will give you all the richness you could ever want from the aged body of a 17th century Guarneri. They are also great for rock and some brittle jazz as they will tame the sibilance and shrill, harsh highs that are present in many recordings.

What they couldn't produce was the air and that small space just above the strings of a violin where the bows rosin dust ascends ever so slightly. It's this space, where the hairs of the bow skip across the strings that the HD600 was unable to produce. The sound of the bow just making contact with, and dragging across the strings was missing.

Perhaps that's a bit esoteric and I KNOW that few care about this, but I do.

I also know that if the cans are able to produce this, they can produce the extreme highs in any type of music. They can produce the sound of the drum stick making contact with the cymbal or high-hat. The crispness of Jazz or rock was missing because of this and while these cans ROCKED, they didn't crackle with life. That's what I missed, that breath... The breath that is the wind rushing between the reeds of a wind instrument or saxophone. The sound that makes live music just that... alive. Hearing a closely mic'd violinist breathing can actually bring a performance to life (as opposed to the Zemph recordings).

So that's my long-winded (pun intended) review of the HD600.

I really like them and they do a whole lot very well. For many, these are the best cans in that price range. But I'm listening for things others probably aren't and so in the end these just didn't cut it... for me.

shane

 

[mark2410]

hmm i think people may be over exaggerating. befor my hd600 came i awas really worried theyd be terrible with no proper desktop amp. yes they run much better of my xm5 but running unamped of a shuffle of the desktop comp they still sound good, really very good. okay so they are constrained unamped but by no means do they sound bad

 

[.Sup]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aimlink /img/forum/go_quote.gif Words very well written and which describe my own impressions exactly.

x2

 

[R300]

Quote:

Originally Posted by shane55 /img/forum/go_quote.gif The sound of the bow just making contact with, and dragging across the strings was missing.

Listening to Tori Amos, Under n The Pink, I hear piano foot pedals moving, that salivery "click" sound of a slightly dry mouth, fingers coming into contact with strings. Some of the details evident in the Oscar Peterson remasters are just extraordinary. In fact my 580 Jubilees (think 600), recreate all sorts of musical nuances.

Out of interest, what phones do give the quailities you describe? I'm not arguing with your findings, just interested to know

 

[Mato]

Thanks for all the impressions - definitely making me want to give these 'phones a serious audition.

Quote:

Originally Posted by R300 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Out of interest, what phones do give the quailities you describe?

x2 on this.

 

[cAsE sEnSiTiVe]

Here's what I hear from the 600's.

On the entire 'For Duke' album, recorded Direct to Disc, I clearly hear the pages turning on the sheet music between solos, and the takes.

On 'Benny Goodman and Friends', I hear Benny clearly pursing his lips getting ready to play a note on 'Send in the Clowns', as well as drawing breaths during the track.

On James Carter's 'Chasin' the Gypsy', Track 7 'I'll Never Be the Same', you don't have to strain to imagine rosin dust flying from Regina Carter's violin bow, while feeling the deeply resonant tone of James Carter's Bass Saxophone.

All a good headphone or a speaker can do is give you what comes before. If your front end and ancilliary components are up to the task, INCLUDING the recording itself, I believe the 600 will show you the goods without calling attention to any one particular area, unlike some other headphones.

My $.02

 

[Cankin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mato /img/forum/go_quote.gif Definitely the latter and probably the former. I don't know if it's that i'm a 'basshead' - just that because i've never experience mid-fi headphones or above before, i like things coloured? As I say, I love my Quads - are they that coloured to make the HD600 seem like a shock?

It isn't because your Quads are colored, it's just that you more used to the presentation of speakers.

Headphone vs. Speaker = Apple vs. Orange

 

[Bilavideo]

I'm not knocking anybody's quads. I'm just saying the bad rap hurled against both the HD600 and the HD650 is part of something larger. Open cans don't have the bass slam of closed cans. With proper amping, you can capture a lot of bass otherwise leaked and lost. The Sennheisers are not boomy cans but they dig deep, deeper than the Grados - even if some of the Grados have a sizable bass hump. You can get a piece of that just off an iPod, but to really get the full expense, you need amping power.

 

[shane55]

Quote:

Originally Posted by R300 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Listening to Tori Amos, Under n The Pink, I hear piano foot pedals moving, that salivery "click" sound of a slightly dry mouth, fingers coming into contact with strings. Some of the details evident in the Oscar Peterson remasters are just extraordinary. In fact my 580 Jubilees (think 600), recreate all sorts of musical nuances. Out of interest, what phones do give the quailities you describe? I'm not arguing with your findings, just interested to know

You betcha... I just didn't want to hijack the thread.

Beyerdynamic DT880/600ohm (not the 32 or 250ohm).

The ONLY complaint I have about these cans is the lack of really solid bottom end. That said, they are still fairly new and as they break-in they are actually getting better in that arena. The jury's out but open-minded.

Their neutrality, clarity, openness, transience, detail... all the other things I was looking for in this set of cans is there. Their comfort is truly unbelievable. My wife mentioned how they were like slippers.

If I want bass I'll throw on my M50's. But if I want to hear every little detail in the recording, this is my default set.

As I said before, they do not have the warmth, sonority, richness and tonally lush sound of the HD600. Remember... I loved the HD600. They were my favorite. But I heard in the DT880 what I knew was 'missing'. I also realized that all this gorgeous warmth and rich tonality sounded a bit coloured. Very soothing and pleasing, but not what I wanted from my default cans.

The DT880 is not for everyone. My guess is that many would have extremely negative reactions to them. Similar, I suppose to the reaction I had to the 250ohm version. Most would probably think them thin and too crisp with no bass. Guess it all depends on taste and what your want and what you're used to. I want and enjoy analytical HP's.

I put on an old recording and with the HD600, it was clean and beautiful. I put on the Beyers and thought... ah... there it is... tape hiss.

I know, it's a little nuts. But it's all subjective and just one man's opinion.

Cheers

shane

Edit: I think it's important to mention that I'm listening to Lossless, .wav, Hi-res (24/96) music only. No MP3 or lossy compressed files.
These are almost all put though my Xonar STX -> DAC1-Pre. Sometimes also from that configuration through my Outlaw RR2150. CD, SACD etc. are played on my Denon DVD-2930CI -> Outlaw. I'm sure that has some bearing on what I hear and what works for me.

 

[FrankCooter]

You want something that sounds like your quads then you're going to have to get away from dynamics period. Consider orthodynamics or electrostatics.

 

[Mato]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FrankCooter /img/forum/go_quote.gif You want something that sounds like your quads then you're going to have to get away from dynamics period. Consider orthodynamics or electrostatics.

Why is this the case?