[Nick Dangerous]

Creek is *not* better than X-CANS when using the HD600!

 

[joelongwood]

I'm with you, Beagle........of all the headphones I have, I probably use the HD-600s the least. They just don't "move" me. Pleasant, smooth, non-fatiguing.......but like you, I get the feeling that something is missing or hidden. Strange, huh?

 

[Hirsch]

Quote:

Originally posted by MacDEF Having used the HD580 and HD600 with a wide spectrum of amps, I can say that the more powerful and cleaner the amp, the better they sound. They are indeed quite hard to drive in terms of sound quality.

Just asking this rhetorically, but which cans have you heard that don't sound better with a more powerful, cleaner amp? (the only ones I can think of would be those with so little resolving power that an amp would be pointless anyway).

Yes, the top end Senns have better sound quality with a bigger cleaner amp. So does everything else. However, there are several moderately priced amps that are quite sufficient to drive the Senns, and get very good sound out of them. The best possible sound? No, but that's not Sennheiser specific.

Bigger cleaner amps make headphones sound better. If they didn't, we wouldn't want them. That does not imply that the headphones' power requirements demand bigger cleaner amps, or that the headphone is hard to drive. It simply means that the headphone has the resolving capability to tell the difference between good amps and better ones.

 

[MacDEF]

LOL, I knew someone would ask me that question (it's a valid question).

It's very true that all good cans benefit from bigger/better amps. The problem with the HD580/600 is that they sound *significantly* worse without one of those bigger/better amps.

The Grado RS-2, for example, still sound excellent out of the headphone jack on a CD player. The Senns do not. It's hard to make a pair of Grados sound *bad* -- but Senns sound horrible (IMO) fromthe headphone jack on most portable CD players.

So while all headphones sound better given better amplification, IMO the 580/600 *require* very good amplification.

The X-CANv2 or Creek is the *minimum* I would use the HD600 with, and having heard them with much better amps, can say that those two still don't come close to bringing out the best in the HD600.

 

[ai0tron]

MacDef is of course correct.

 

[dngl]

I agree with MacDef... the HD580s are almost completely different phones out of my Melos... but I still think they lack a little bite.

What frustrates me is that they are so close to being exactly what I want, but there's that snap that they lack...

 

[Tuberoller]

Here we go again.ANYBODY that says the RA1 is not capable of driving the Senns has not heard the combo.I feel absolutely confident that is the case.I have owned and used this combo for over a year and they sound great together.The guys that listened to this combo at the Chicago and Detroit head-fi gatherings will attest to this.There was head-fier at the Chicago gathereing that was previously convinced that the RA1-Hd600 was not compatable,then he listened.The 9-volt battery theory is incorrect as well.The Porta-Corda,the JMT amps and the Grado are all powered by 9-volts and each is VERY capable of driving the Senns.I know that the initial statement was"to their full potential".Which amp do you suppose does?and how are you sure of this?I use the HD600 with a MGhead,and Creek as well as the aforementioned portable amps.I have also used it with the XCANSV2,the Grado does a MUCH better job of driving the Senns than the XCANS.The only way the XCANS can approach the clean,neutral sound of the Grado is with it's optional(expensive)powersupply.The MG does sound better than the Grado but I wouldn't call the Grados shortcomings ineffectiveness.I would love it if the Guys that made statements like that would at least listen to the gear they are making comment on.Theory is fine,experience closes the case.

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

Originally posted by ai0tron ...I have read a few reviews which say that they detect a midbass hump in the HD600's output when paired with the RA-1. I also notice this hump with the CMOY, and with the headphone jack on my CDP/minidisk. The hump was very much present with the Creek OBH-11 as well. I think this hump flattens out signifigantly with the addition of more power.

I agree, that's what I'm hearing with both the Max and the SAC on the 580's.

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

Here we go again.ANYBODY that says the RA1 is not capable of driving the Senns has not heard the combo.I feel absolutely confident that is the case.I have owned and used this combo for over a year and they sound great together..[snip] I would love it if the Guys that made statements like that would at least listen to the gear they are making comment on.Theory is fine,experience closes the case.

Tuberoller, no one said the HD600 sound *bad* with the RA-1 -- only that the RA-1 can't drive them to their potential.

Having heard the HD600 with an RA-1 recently, I still contend that is the case. Of course, my perspective is a bit skewed. Since I use an amp (Max 2001) with a LOT more power, and which was surely designed and tested using the HD600 quite a bit (the HD600 has always been one of HeadRoom's favorite cans), I think I have one of the best "HD600 amps" available. And compared to the Max, the RA-1 wasn't that great. But it shouldn't be as good, considering the price difference

Basically, I've heard the HD600 with a range of amps: Airhead, Little, X-CANv2, RA-1, Max. With each step up in quality and power (with the RA-1 and the X-CANv2 on about the same level, just with different strengths), the HD600 got significantly better. While some of the improvement is due to electronics, a lot is due to power. The RA-1 simply doesn't have the power that a Max does. So I think that it's a very fair statement to say that the RA-1 can't drive the HD600 to its potential (or even near its potential, for that matter). That statement can co-exist with the statement that HD600 can sound good with the RA-1. I just personally wouldn't buy the RA-1 for the HD600; I would go for an amp with a dedicated, regulated power supply.

 

[Beagle]

Quote:

And compared to the Max, the RA-1 wasn't that great. But it shouldn't be as good, considering the price difference

In The Absolute Sound amp reviews, the RA-1 was ranked much higher than the Max. The Grado was on a par with the McCormack and the Max was "ugly, dark and closed in". Does not sound like something that would help solve my problem with the HD600. And I'm not paying $1400 US to find that out either.

joelongwood and Jon Beilin seem to concur with what I hear, but I was wondering about something. My HD600 is close to three years old. Might it be that my pads have "collapsed" somewhat from use and too much pad is interfering with the drivers/sound? Perhaps I should buy a new set of pads before I blame the phones.

Still, even when they were in their first year, they didn't give me the detail, clarity, openness, soundstage, dynamics, speed and bass transparency that the AKG 501 provides.

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

In The Absolute Sound amp reviews, the RA-1 was ranked much higher than the Max. The Grado was on a par with the McCormack and the Max was "ugly, dark and closed in". Does not sound like something that would help solve my problem with the HD600. And I'm not paying $1400 US to find that out either.

I was actually joking about the "buy a Max" comment. While it will definitely help, it's a bit much, I know

But as for the review you mentioned, either The Absolute Sound was using a very old Max (when was that article written? Older Max's had a reputation for being a bit darker), or I have lost all respect for them as reviewers LOL. What headphones did they use? What equipment. Because to say that a Max 2001 is ugly, dark, and closed in, or even *one* of those three adjectives, is really beyond belief. The Max is not ugly, not dark, and not closed in at all. [I'm not saying that because I own one -- I'm saying that because I've heard the Max with a range of sources and a range of headphones, and it's simply preposterous.] The RA-1 is a good amp, but it is in no way comparable to a Max 2001 (except, perhaps, in some magical combination with a Grado headphone, for which it was specifically designed, and even then...). I'm saying that based on actually hearing both, not based on hearsay.

As for the HD600, you've had similar criticisms of the HD600 for quite a while; you also sound very convinced that the K501 are the absolute pinnacle of netruality and enjoyment for you. It sounds to me like the HD600 just isn't the right headphone for you? (I mean that seriously, not facetiously.)

 

[Beagle]

KR: They reviewed about 6 headphone amps, including the prestigious Holmes-Powell and EAR amps, using HP-1, RS-1 and HD600 phones. The article was April 2000, I believe. The RA-1 and McCormack were rated sonically above the Max. And since there was no manufacturers comment indicating the unit was defective, I assume HeadRoom accepted the reviewers rating. I simply cannot believe that TAS would be that far off the mark.

Back to the HD600, I suppose it's all context. Anyone who went from a PortaPro or SR40 to the HD600 would be amazed. Going from the K501 to HD600 is a little different. They both present the true picture from different angles, I guess.

I doubt I would pass up on a Max or Holmes-Powell at a steal of a price but there is something perverse about spending $1500-$5000 US for an amp to drive $200-$500 headphones. There would be no high end (or few participants) if someone had to spend $100,000 on an amplifer to drive their $10,000 speakers properly.

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

The article was April 2000, I believe. The RA-1 and McCormack were rated sonically above the Max.

That makes a little more sense to me; I never heard the older Max, but many people felt that it was too dark and didn't have as much detail as other good amps; considering that the RA-1 is known for having good detail, I could understand liking it better.

 

[Vertigo-1]

Quote:

Still, even when they were in their first year, they didn't give me the detail, clarity, openness, soundstage, dynamics, speed and bass transparency that the AKG 501 provides.

Well, it's pretty simple, you have a reference to put up against the HD600, and thus you hear that "veil" that some of us who also have clearer headphones have heard. The difference in clarity is only magnified if you're driving the HD600 with an underpowered amp. I ultimately ditched my HD600s because compared to every headphone I had, they just sounded darker and veiled. And nobody can tell me that I don't have an amp that's powerful enough to drive them or a source that ain't good enough for 'em.

I have an amp that was pratically made for HD600s, and they still sound veiled, compared to my other headphones.

 

[jude]

Quote:

Originally posted by Vertigo-1 Well, it's pretty simple, you have a reference to put up against the HD600, and thus you hear that "veil" that some of us who also have clearer headphones have heard. The difference in clarity is only magnified if you're driving the HD600 with an underpowered amp. I ultimately ditched my HD600s because compared to every headphone I had, they just sounded darker and veiled. And nobody can tell me that I don't have an amp that's powerful enough to drive them or a source that ain't good enough for 'em. I have an amp that was pratically made for HD600s, and they still sound veiled, compared to my other headphones.

I'll never claim I can hear for anyone else, so I can only state my experience/opinion: the HD-600's aren't veiled in any way to me. In fact, as far as I'm concerned, they're just the opposite -- detailed, with a great sense delicacy, detail and impact (though in a different way than, say, Grados). And, this is in my experience, even versus other 'phones.

But I won't argue it. And I believe that you hear it differently. It's just that I don't hear it that way at all.