[catscratch]

I like the HD650. It's one of the few dynamics that doesn't hype up the highs to create an illusion of detail, yet still manages to be pretty detailed throughout. The main issue with it is its ability to sound truly wretched on bad gear. Underpowered amps will make it sound dark and wooly, and bad digital sources will make it sound thin, grainy, and strident. Combine both and, well, you get the idea. Since it's priced reasonably enough, people will buy it and plug it into just about anything, instead of treating it like the high-end headphone that it is, and you end up with listening impressions that are all over the place.

Of course, you don't have to spend a ton to get the most out of these headphones; something like a Bottlehead Crack or Millett Hybrid will drive them just fine, and you can put the rest into the source. You end up with a rig that has good tonality, good resolution without harshness, and a pretty spatious and open sound for a headphone. The bass could use some improvement, but most dynamics struggle in the bass anyway, and the HD650 fares better than most.

You could do better, but you'd have to move up to electrostatics to get it, and spend a whole lot more - that is, if you don't want to go with vintage 'stats.

 

[Matrixnobu]

Quote:

 
Your list shows you to at least somewhat like Grados....in contrast, I'd concur Senns would be boring

  Nothing from Senn has ever had a truly "fun" (u/v) FR curve, and favors either linearity or boosted mids.  That just comes down to preference of how one likes to listen (and the optimum, of course, is own both!)
 
One thing with the 650's is that they change and adapt amazingly to changes in your source.   I've had my HD650s for many years, and they've moved with me to many different sources.   In their current setup they'd be almost unrecognizable from the setup they started with, and have come to life remarkably.  They aren't legendary for scalability for nothing!  It too had dropped them to being the "boring" or "relaxing" headphone after I got my HE-400s.  But after some tweaks (cables, tubes) HD650 is definitely the more involving one again. 
 
I happen to not be a fan of extremely "fun" cans. They end up losing my interest quickly.  So my version of "involving" will be different from someone who favors steeper FR curves.

 
 
IEMCrazy what type of system are you running your HD-650's with?

 

[IEMCrazy]

 
Edit for below: sheer bass, not deeer bass...lousy computer that won't let me edit or backspace properly....
Quote:

I like the HD650. It's one of the few dynamics that doesn't hype up the highs to create an illusion of detail, yet still manages to be pretty detailed throughout. The main issue with it is its ability to sound truly wretched on bad gear. Underpowered amps will make it sound dark and wooly, and bad digital sources will make it sound thin, grainy, and strident. Combine both and, well, you get the idea. Since it's priced reasonably enough, people will buy it and plug it into just about anything, instead of treating it like the high-end headphone that it is, and you end up with listening impressions that are all over the place.
Of course, you don't have to spend a ton to get the most out of these headphones; something like a Bottlehead Crack or Millett Hybrid will drive them just fine, and you can put the rest into the source. You end up with a rig that has good tonality, good resolution without harshness, and a pretty spatious and open sound for a headphone. The bass could use some improvement, but most dynamics struggle in the bass anyway, and the HD650 fares better than most.
You could do better, but you'd have to move up to electrostatics to get it, and spend a whole lot more - that is, if you don't want to go with vintage 'stats.

+1, you said it all quite well. While at present priice "reasonably priced" doesn't apply quite as much as it did even a few months ago, that definitely contributes to it.   They dont neeed fortunes in gear, though they'll take fortunes just fine, but they do need "good" to give their real flavor ithout sounding at best, average.  They aren't bass beasts, and I like my bassier headphones for certain things (D5k, HE-400), but their timbre, tonality, and soundstage are indeed very ticky to beat without dumping some remarkable amounts of money.  
 
The same applies for K70x.  It's not as amp picky as HD650, but it does need some serious current, and sounds really bad on most gear, but can sound pretty impressive, especially for the price, with better gear.  For most non-electronic genres, though, I don't miss the deeer bass of the other cans when listening to 650.

 

[IEMCrazy]

Quote:

 
 
IEMCrazy what type of system are you running your HD-650's with?

Nothing terribly exotic, but pretty nice all the same.
 
HD650's gone through numerous setups for me.  Headroom Micro (Desktop, old) + Onkyo 504 AVR & PS soundcard, Micro + EMU-0404, Micro + Onkyo 504 + Yamaha....can't remember the model number SACD player.Same combos as above, but with Denon 2310ci instead of the Onkyo.   A few itterations of various things in between until  I got it to my current state where HD650 is just superb: Squeezebox Touch->S/PDIF coax->Schiit Bifrost->Schiit Lyr.  The final touches were the Moon Silver Dragon cable and upgrading the stock GE tubes on Lyr to some Mullards.  I saved those details for last since cables and in some cases tubes can be the most controversial  But hey, the OP here has a Blue Dragon, so it's fair game
 
The cable, for me, really moved the HD650's back to equal the HE-40s, but the Mullards sealed the deal.  HD650 is heavenly again
 
I also have an Objective 2 SS amp for when I feel like objective sound, but I happen to prefer, strongly, tube sound, both with 650 and HE-400.  For me the euphonics are just more like a live performance. Tube rolling can be another bottomless pit, of course... 

 

[spiderking31]

I must admit....I'm very happy for your comments...you, and everyone that has contributed to my thread...I'm extremely happy to hear that my headphones are that awesome! Thanks everyone for the info! I'm glad I have an awesome pair of headphones on my head right now....thanks a million everyone!

 

[Zombie_X]

The HD650, while good, glazes over everything with a "haze". There is a lot of midbass with not much sub-bass. The treble is really rolled off and sounds very withdrawn and ill defined. Headphone is not as detailed as the HD600 as Sennheiser chose to tune this headphone to be more enjoyable, from what I've come to understand. The midrange is quite nice and is lush but it sounds a bit "too" lush to me and the sound is somewhat smeared. The soundstage is average at best and is pretty small in comparison tot he DT880.
 
I think the HD600 is a vastly better headphone. It has more treble, more detail, better bass response (not more bass, but more balanced and extended), The mids are pretty resolving with a nice toasty flavor to them. The headphone all around is more of what I'd like to define as "reference". Superb detail, excellent balance, and not that hard to amp at all.

 

[Matrixnobu]

Quote:

Nothing terribly exotic, but pretty nice all the same.
 
HD650's gone through numerous setups for me.  Headroom Micro (Desktop, old) + Onkyo 504 AVR & PS soundcard, Micro + EMU-0404, Micro + Onkyo 504 + Yamaha....can't remember the model number SACD player.Same combos as above, but with Denon 2310ci instead of the Onkyo.   A few itterations of various things in between until  I got it to my current state where HD650 is just superb: Squeezebox Touch->S/PDIF coax->Schiit Bifrost->Schiit Lyr.  The final touches were the Moon Silver Dragon cable and upgrading the stock GE tubes on Lyr to some Mullards.  I saved those details for last since cables and in some cases tubes can be the most controversial  But hey, the OP here has a Blue Dragon, so it's fair game
 
The cable, for me, really moved the HD650's back to equal the HE-40s, but the Mullards sealed the deal.  HD650 is heavenly again
 
I also have an Objective 2 SS amp for when I feel like objective sound, but I happen to prefer, strongly, tube sound, both with 650 and HE-400.  For me the euphonics are just more like a live performance. Tube rolling can be another bottomless pit, of course... 

 
Good to know. I was thinking of getting a bifrost and valhalla. But I might go for the Lyr then. And get the Mullard tubes.
 
Thanks for the feedback!

 

[Matrixnobu]

I found the 600's to have a much smaller soundstage though. That's why I prefered the 650's. And with the right amp don't sound veiled to me.

 

[TMRaven]

Eh I found both 600 and 650 to roll off equally as much.

 

[spiderking31]

I don't think the hd650's have a haze....I personally think the soundstage is huge, and extremely detailed....and these are the most impressive headphones I've ever heard...and I own the hd595's, and also owned others....best headphones ever....only if properly amped, and used with after market cables...

 

[Zombie_X]

The HD600 and HD650 don't require as strong amping as many would leave you to believe. Over the past four years here I have come to see that amping is greatly exaggerated. There is never a "night and day" difference with amping but the improvement is noticeable right away. Even a Matrix M-Stage is plenty for the HD600. Also the HD650 is easier to amp than the HD600, but only by a small bit. It's not a huge difference. Amping doesn't wake them up at all, finding a brighter amp does. 
 
And when I meant haze, and this is for everyone, I do not mean a veil. They just sound slurred and fuzzy. The transients are there but lack that edge or pop I have gotten used to from the DT880 and T1. The HD600 has this edge as I call it which makes transients stand out more. With the HD650 they transients sound slurred and smeared. The lack of treble energy on this headphone also hurts the transients and detail.
 
The HD650's soundstage is smaller than the HD600, presumably to make the listening experience more personal. Who knows exactly why. I also found the imaging to be pretty meh at best. Many here know I hate the HD650 for how muffled it sounds. It's a sound signature that I can not bring myself to enjoy..
 
Quote:

I don't think the hd650's have a haze....I personally think the soundstage is huge, and extremely detailed....and these are the most impressive headphones I've ever heard...and I own the hd595's, and also owned others....best headphones ever....only if properly amped, and used with after market cables...

 

[spiderking31]

I have a solid state amp....they sound awesome....but I'm getting a little dot mk3 tube amp in the next couple of months...would love to see how they sound on a tube amp

 

[Matrixnobu]

You mean the 600's have a smaller soundstage?....
 
 
Quote:

The HD600 and HD650 don't require as strong amping as many would leave you to believe. Over the past four years here I have come to see that amping is greatly exaggerated. There is never a "night and day" difference with amping but the improvement is noticeable right away. Even a Matrix M-Stage is plenty for the HD600. Also the HD650 is easier to amp than the HD600, but only by a small bit. It's not a huge difference. Amping doesn't wake them up at all, finding a brighter amp does. 
 
And when I meant haze, and this is for everyone, I do not mean a veil. They just sound slurred and fuzzy. The transients are there but lack that edge or pop I have gotten used to from the DT880 and T1. The HD600 has this edge as I call it which makes transients stand out more. With the HD650 they transients sound slurred and smeared. The lack of treble energy on this headphone also hurts the transients and detail.
 
The HD650's soundstage is smaller than the HD600, presumably to make the listening experience more personal. Who knows exactly why. I also found the imaging to be pretty meh at best. Many here know I hate the HD650 for how muffled it sounds. It's a sound signature that I can not bring myself to enjoy..
 

 

[tdockweiler]

Quote:

The HD600 and HD650 don't require as strong amping as many would leave you to believe. Over the past four years here I have come to see that amping is greatly exaggerated. There is never a "night and day" difference with amping but the improvement is noticeable right away. Even a Matrix M-Stage is plenty for the HD600. Also the HD650 is easier to amp than the HD600, but only by a small bit. It's not a huge difference. Amping doesn't wake them up at all, finding a brighter amp does. 
 
And when I meant haze, and this is for everyone, I do not mean a veil. They just sound slurred and fuzzy. The transients are there but lack that edge or pop I have gotten used to from the DT880 and T1. The HD600 has this edge as I call it which makes transients stand out more. With the HD650 they transients sound slurred and smeared. The lack of treble energy on this headphone also hurts the transients and detail.
 
The HD650's soundstage is smaller than the HD600, presumably to make the listening experience more personal. Who knows exactly why. I also found the imaging to be pretty meh at best. Many here know I hate the HD650 for how muffled it sounds. It's a sound signature that I can not bring myself to enjoy..
 

 
That sounded funny.. first you say the HD-600/650 isn't that hard to drive and amping is greatly exaggerated and then go on to suggest a $300 M-Stage is Plenty

Thought you were going to suggest that an E5 was fine.
I think the HD-600/650 sound fine from my Total Airhead. I think people have gotten similar results with a PA2V2.
 
Your description of the HD-650 is kind of how I heard it. Smaller soundstage than the HD-600, but this is kind of nice at times. I did however find the HD-650 a tiny bit less grainy than the HD-600. It took specific music and many A/B comparisons to tell the difference though.
At first I thought the HD-650 didn't lack treble at all until I tried them with gaming..sounded even darker than my K601 and that's not good. For music it's treble is OK for me. Acoustic music often sounded a bit congested on the HD-650.
 
I actually think the HD-650 does female vocals better than the HD-600 though.
 
For me, I prefer the HD-580 to the HD-600 and HD-650. Same driver I know. Less mid-bass and more forward upper-mids and treble compared to the HD-600. Possibly better sub-bass. You can check the graphs and this is all due to the grill apparently. HD-580 sound to me like a slightly more aggressive and fun HD-600. Maybe more colored, but I don't care.

 

[tdockweiler]

Quote:

You mean the 600's have a smaller soundstage?....
 
 

I don't think that's what he means. The HD-600 sounds more airy and has a slightly larger soundstage. Sounds that way to me and many others.