[Rotmammoth]

OO ****. Did not expect so many responses.  Thank you all for the info. 
 
Do you guys have any suggestions on what headphones I should get next? 
Currently using Sennheiser 595 with one of those E5 FiiO amps.  Not sure what I should get next but I really do like the sound stage that Sennheisers' offers.  It would be nice to get a can with better bass, but I'm not a bass junky so it doesn't matter too much.

 

[MalVeauX]

Quote:

It would be nice to get a can with better bass, but I'm not a bass junky so it doesn't matter too much.

This is confusing.

 
The 595's have decent bass. You want more bass. But you're not a bass junky.
 
Check out the DT990's?
 
Very best,

 

[Rotmammoth]

Are the 595's considered decent bass?  People always say that sennheisers are weak on bass.  I haven't tried any other brands so I can't really judge.  The other day I was looking at Beyerdynamic's DT 770, 880, 990 and they pretty much look the same and have the same technical data.  Why is there a difference in price?  Is it just because one is closed, one is semi-closed, and one is open? 

 

[kn19h7]

Quote:

Because I, and probably the OP as well, don't have warehouses filled with demo headphones. In the very best of chances, I can try on a Sennheiser HD595. I have not even ever seen an Ultrasone, and a Grado is just a mythological object around here.
 
 

In this case, most likely measurements/looks/instinct/price/etc would weight more than reviews on my decision.. to me its too hard to reliably "review" the "reviews"
 

 

[wind016]

Quote:

In this case, most likely measurements/looks/instinct/price/etc would weight more than reviews on my decision.. to me its too hard to reliably "review" the "reviews"
 

Actually, it seems Ultrasones don't measure very accurately...
 

 

[kn19h7]

Quote:

Quote:

Actually, it seems Ultrasones don't measure very accurately...
 

It seems the s-logic is working on that ==
 
Tried pro900 and ed8 but don't really like either. The ed8 was still being categorized as enjoyable but I really don't get the "extremely neutral and spacious sounding" stated by some members here, not to mention to crown it as "the best closed cans ever made"..

 

[brooce]

If the tech data were actually conclusive, reviews would then stop being sales tools....and the industry can't have that
Best test is listening, feeling, touching.
 

 

[brooce]

Quote:

Are the 595's considered decent bass?  People always say that sennheisers are weak on bass.  I haven't tried any other brands so I can't really judge.  The other day I was looking at Beyerdynamic's DT 770, 880, 990 and they pretty much look the same and have the same technical data.  Why is there a difference in price?  Is it just because one is closed, one is semi-closed, and one is open? 

I haven't heard people always say that Sennheisers are weak on bass.
Anyway the HD555 and HD595 both "break up" when bass extends lower than what it's comfortable with when cranked up.
 
In other words, they don't extend as far down as they could and they just lose control when given a deeper bass tone. Not recommended for deep bass-heavy music especially when played at higher volumes.
 
What's more of an issue with both of these models is the veiled presentation. I have them both and don't recommend them. The HD555 is the one I would buy if you had to choose between these two since the sound is so similar to the 595 (which tends to have just a little more sparkle and is marketed and presented differently - for marketing reasons - yet is totally not worth the price difference and you could easily mistake the HD555 for the HD595, soncially).
 
On the plus side, they are relatively easy to drive and comfort is good.
 
 

 

[Acix]

Quote:

Actually, they should show you something very important which is the sound signature. However, looking at MalVeauX's graph, I can't believe the AKG K701 even compares to the DT770 in the low end.

As I said...the graph is a part of sound signature, and most of the today hps have more to offer than what the 2 dimensional graphs reveal to you, I mean did you ever saw sound stage or depth graph? About the K701 compares to the DT770, you can clearly see that on the 20-30hz is almost similar. The DT770 push the lowmids 120hz by 6db, and many other hps push in the same area to trick you to think..."wow, what a cool bass"....and this is like to think the HD-650 are bassy, and the HD800 don't have enough bass.
 

 
 

 

[Acix]

Quote:

 

 
What about impulse response? Distortion? Square wave? CSD waterfall?
 
Why are we only focusing on the FR graphs?

Maybe because the FR graphs is revealing more vital information . 

 

[oldshoe99]

Maybe because the FR graphs is revealing more vital information . 

Probably because we can hear the frequencies easily. When the tech guys translate those other tests into something any of us can do in listening, then they will be more relevant.

 

[Rotmammoth]

How do you even interpret those graphs?  What is amplitude?  Sorry, new to this type of stuff,

 

[wind016]

 
Quote:

Maybe because the FR graphs is revealing more vital information . 

FR graphs are only useful for discerning frequency peaks and roll offs. Other than that, the other information is more or just as important.
 

 

[HairPhones]

The frequency response graphs plots frequency against amplitude, amplitude being the sound pressure.
 
So, to show an example...
 
http://www.headphone.com/learning-center/build-a-graph.php?graphID[0]=533&graphID[1]=563&graphID[2]=&graphID[3]=&graphType=0&buttonSelection=Compare+Headphones
 


If you look at the mid-bass (around 80 - 140 hz), you would see that the 555s has more mid-bass, since it has more amplitude than that of the 280s, meaning that there's more sound pressure at those frequencies & thus more sound. If you look at the low bass, you'll see that the 280s have more than do the 555s.
 
But don't always trust graphs. They're not always accurate.
 
See this example:
 

 
Many people on Head-Fi believe that the Pro 900 is king of bass.
Yet you can see on that graph that the Solos would actually have more bass than the Pros.
 
There's a difference between FR graphs & human perception. Also, remember that these graphs don't account for quality. It's just there for people to assume sound signatures.
You'll never really know quality until you try it.
 
 
Quote:

How do you even interpret those graphs?  What is amplitude?  Sorry, new to this type of stuff,

 

 

[LizardKing1]

Quote:

How do you even interpret those graphs?  What is amplitude?  Sorry, new to this type of stuff,

No problem, we all had to learn it someway, be it more straightforward or not. Basically, sound is a physical wave, it's air particles moving. That wave has a certain frequency (or combination of frequencies, but let's focus on a single frequency). So the higher the frequency, the higher the pitch we hear; so the low frequencies are bass, the middle frequencies are mids (duh) and the higher frequencies are treble. The human ear can go from 20Hz (sub-bass, oomph) to 20kHz (very few adults can actually hear that high, it's more like 17kHz).
 
So basically these graphs tell you what a headphone's response to frequency is, that is, if it has peaks or not in certain frequencies. The hypothetical perfect headphone would be a flat line, so it wouldn't emphasize anything and the sound it created was the exact same as the one on the sound file. However it's very hard and expensive to create such a headphone, so we do our best 

 also some people as myself like our headphones emphasized in certain frequencies. So if we have a headphone that has a peak in the lower frequencies, we know we will hear the bass more than the rest, thus it's a bassy headphone. If the curve goes up in the end by the higher frequencies, it has emphasized treble, and so it's a bright headphone.
 
What the big argument here was about was that apparently, certain headphone graphs don't correspond to reality, that is, even though they have very identical graphs, these two headphones are completely different: one is quite bassy, the other is bright.