Is The 580/600/650 $ Difference worth it

[stewtheking]

I've auditioned both the HD580 and the HD650 side by side out of my gear. The HD650 was the clear winner in terms of bass response and overall detail, but there was no extra enjoyment of the music for me.

I was also considering this upgrade a little while back, but decided against it. The increase in quality wasn't going to lead to any significant increase in enjoyment for me, and I realised my money would be better spent with a source upgrade instead. (hello NAD 514).

If the money were no object then I'd say the 650 is the right choice, but if you're worried about budget, then I say stick with the 580's.

 

[mshan]

I jumped up from the HD600 to the HD650 and found the upgrade very worthwhile (I find the HD650 slightly more pure and seamless sounding than the HD600. They do have a slightly darker tonal balance than the HD600, but I tend to like a weightier, more midbass midrange centric tonal balance). Personal preference and system synergy are probably just as important (e.g. I found the ASL MG Head OTL mk. 2 headphone amp a better match for the HD600 than the HD650).

HD580 aren't supposed to be as revealing as either of the above and are supposed to be a better match for "lesser" upstream components. With these types of components, HD580 and HD600 are supposed to sound the same.

 

[Mercuttio]

The overall build of the HD650 is a step up from the HD580, but I still think the 580's a more balanced phone.

 

[utarch00]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ERNEST T Thanks everybody. I will keep the 580's. You saved me some money. I already have the 650 cables coming now if I can just find some 600 grills. Sennheiser don't show them on there website.

You have to call them to get the grills.

 

[drkpond3]

I have the 580's and the 600's and I can definitely hear a clear difference in the presentation.

At first, I thought the 580's were more musical - the 600's sounded more detailed but a little stiffer and more mechanical by comparison. I would have describe the difference as similar to the way a good single-ended tube amp is more romantic than good push-pull tube amp; both can be very satisfying but have different sonics and strengths.

After I upgraded my amp (Berning Micro ZOTL) with different resistors and caps, the 600's really came into their own. The synergy with the upgraded ZOTL and the 600's was really nice. The extra detail was welcome - the sound was controlled, warm, sweet, and detailed. Maybe not the pace and bass of Grados, but very satisfying.

Having said that, the 580's are still very nice and listenable. Good sound, no fuss. Perhaps the 580's don't do the goosebump thing as well as the 600's, but it's really forgiving and nice to listen to. It may be my particular phones, but the 580's clamp onto my head just right. My 600's err on the "too tight" side. Annoying when I'm trying to listen long term.

I'm glad to see that after all the upgrading Sennheiser has done, none of these phones are rendered obsolete. More like different options for different tastes.

Best,
drkpond3

 

[slindeman]

If people would state their length of experience with these headphones it would help.

I personally have owned all three and used them as my main headphone for more than 2 years each, and owned the HD580 and HD600 at the same time. I personally think the $ difference is worth it as you move up the line. I consider my HD650/Equinox at $550 a better bargain than my HD580 at $120 because it sounds amazing with everything I listen to. I can't say that about HD580. I didn't like it for rock or pop music.

I can honestly say that with my HD650/Equinox/HD300 system I can put on any of my discs from any genre and never have to worry about not enjoying the music. The only other times I've experienced that were with headphones that cost more than my entire system. I didn't experience that with Grado HP2, or Stax SR-404, or HD600, or K701, or any other headphone I've owned.

So as always, I'll say that there is nothing like hearing it yourself-- and owning it for a month or two is better still. You will never know until you try, and that's why I've gone through 20+ headphones and will probably go through 20+ more in the next 6 years.

 

[guru388]

I have told this story before so I'll try to cut it short. I buy alot of eq from a great company called Full Compass. They sent all three Sennheisers to me at the same time so I could audition them. They sent the 580 the 600 and the 650. I did hear a big difference between the 580 and the 600. But I decided the difference between the 600 and the 650 was worth the extra money to get the 650. Slight difference but I noticed it and now I am in heaven with my 650s and the Little Dot 2 + headphone amp. Why not just go for the best?

 

[bismack]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeChuck It's important to point out that the 580/600 use the EXACT same drivers, the only difference is that in the 600 the drivers are more accurately matched, and the casing is better (which may effect the sound).

Is this really true? I heard the mid ranges of HD580 and HD600 are very different: hd580 has a warmer mid range while hd600 has a colder mid range.

 

[bperboy]

I think something like a Warmer or Colder midrange really doesn't constitute a big difference in sound. I think that something that is very different in sound would be a comparision between say a Sennheiser and Grado can. I think that differing midrange tonality would be considered a rather minor difference. All IMHO of course!

That said, I love my 580s and I don't think that I would put down the money for the 650s, as I've recabled my 580s, and I'm thinkin about calling SennUSA to get some 600 grills.

 

[Seamaster]

The better your CDP & Amp are, the better you will like 650 over 580/600.

 

[hwc]

Since all references to the HD 580 have been removed from the Sennheiser website within the past few days, I would say that the more relevant price/value comparisons are the HD 595, HD 600, and HD 650.

All three appear to use very similar drivers. The differences lie in the impedance (obvious implications on amplifier requirements), the positioning of the driver (the HD 595 has the driver mounted slighly forward angling back at the ear), and comfort issues from the different physical designs.

The frequency response curves generated by the HeadRoom folk indeed suggest that these are very similar headphones:

The shapes of the curves are nearly identical, with the bass region of the HD 650 elevated about 3 dB above the HD 595 and the HD 600 falling in between. This, along with the fact that it will play louder with a given amplifier, would explain why the HD 595 is perceived as being slightly "brighter" or more "forward".

 

[milkpowder]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hwc The frequency response curves generated by the HeadRoom folk indeed suggest that these are very similar headphones: The shapes of the curves are nearly identical, with the bass region of the HD 650 elevated about 3 dB above the HD 595 and the HD 600 falling in between. This, along with the fact that it will play louder with a given amplifier, would explain why the HD 595 is perceived as being slightly "brighter" or more "forward".

Also, if you look at the high freq, the HD595 does seem like they're brighter than the 650/600.

 

[hwc]

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkpowder Also, if you look at the high freq, the HD595 does seem like they're brighter than the 650/600.

Right. What we perceive as "brightness" would be in the 2 octaves from 1000 Hz to 4000 Hz -- five tick-marks left of 2000 and one tick-mark right of 2000 on the graph above. All three headphones measure essentially the same -- +/- 1 dB or so.

It's the bass levels that influence the perception of brightness. If you have tone controls on a high fi system, set everything to flat. Then, boost the bass control by 3 dB. I guarantee that it will sound less "bright" -- not because you've changed the mids/treble, but because you've emphasized the bass. Conversely, reduce the bass by 3dB from flat and it will suddenly sound "brighter".

The stuff above 10,000 Hz -- five tickmarks to the right of 2000 -- is largely inaudible. Before the CD came along, nobody even listened to a recording that would have information at 15,000 Hz or above. FM radio is restricted to a max of 15,000. Spec-sheets notwithstanding, cassette tapes and vinyl LPS wouldn't go that high in the real world, either.

When I used to do frequency response sweeps of loudspeakers, close-miked with calibrated mics, the graphs would continue up above 15,000, but you can't hear anything standing in the room.

 

[milkpowder]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hwc Right. What we perceive as "brightness" would be in the 2 octaves from 1000 Hz to 4000 Hz -- five tick-marks left of 2000 and one tick-mark right of 2000 on the graph above. All three headphones measure essentially the same -- +/- 1 dB or so. It's the bass levels that influence the perception of brightness. If you have tone controls on a high fi system, set everything to flat. Then, boost the bass control by 3 dB. I guarantee that it will sound less "bright" -- not because you've changed the mids/treble, but because you've emphasized the bass. Conversely, reduce the bass by 3dB from flat and it will suddenly sound "brighter". The stuff above 10,000 Hz -- five tickmarks to the right of 2000 -- is largely inaudible. Before the CD came along, nobody even listened to a recording that would have information at 15,000 Hz or above. FM radio is restricted to a max of 15,000. Spec-sheets notwithstanding, cassette tapes and vinyl LPS wouldn't go that high in the real world, either. When I used to do frequency response sweeps of loudspeakers, close-miked with calibrated mics, the graphs would continue up above 15,000, but you can't hear anything standing in the room.

Don't we all learn something new everyday?

What other bits of the graph should we look at to know the sound signature? What do the very high frequencies tell us about the headphone?

 

[hwc]

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkpowder What do the very high frequencies tell us about the headphone?

Not much. Most of the dips and peaks on those graphs above 8000 Hz probably result more from the interaction of the mic placement in the ear canal of the test dummy head they use than anything inherent in the behavior of the drivers.

The wavelength of sine wave tone at 12,000 Hz is just over an inch. So as the wave interacts with the shape of the ear, there will be all kinds of cancellations and reinforcements at particular frequencies. That's what you are seeing on the graph. As the wavelengths get short relative to the diameter of the driver, dispersion falls dramatically -- in other words, you can only hear those frequencies when your ear is directly on-axis of the driver, not off to the side.

You'd have to measure the drivers in free air, close mic'd with the mic directly on-axis, to see the inherent frequency response of the driver in the ultra-high frequencies. BTW, there would be nothing up in those ranges on a recording, unless the recording was close-mic'd. If you recorded a symphony or jazz ensemble or acoustic guitar with microphones out in the room, those ultra high frequencies would be largely absorbed by the room before they reached the mic. Even when close mic'd, you are only talking about extreme overtones or harmonics.

The highest note on an 88 key piano is just over 4100 Hz. The absolute highest fundamental tone you can play on Fender Stratocaster guitar is about 1100 Hz. Everything above that is overtones.