[kman1211]

I have to agree on the HM5 and all the clones it has. It's a really dark headphone, it has a slight dip in the lower midrange, massive dip in the treble and the whole treble range rolled-off, they are not neutral or flat, they are dark and muffled. EQing them does help but it still sounds unnatural. I would say they are quite overrated. I'm never going to buy from hype again and I know to avoid dark headphones like the plague now. The Sennheiser HD 555 is the worst supposedly good cheaper headphone I have owned. It wasn't really dark sounding to me, maybe slightly, but I found them quite poor for their price but they were better than the headphones that I had before. The entire spectrum is grainy. Midrange was funky, lacked treble energy and sub-bass. Lacked detail, instruments lacked definition and the list goes on. I can't hear what others thought were good about them. I think the HD 600 and HD 650 are also overrated. Both sounded kind of dark and somewhat slow, especially the HD 650. Detail and clarity wasn't what I expected from headphones at those prices, they sound better than what I have but I would not buy them as I don't find them worth their price at all. Something seemed missing from their sound that I can't put my finger on, same with the other Senns I have listened to as well as the HM5s. So far Sennheiser is not for me and they are quite overpriced in my experience, so I would say from my experience that Sennheiser is overrated, they aren't bad or anything, I just didn't find them all that great for their price, I liked the HD 280 and HD 380 but still something seemed lacking from both and I think they are both overpriced. I think dark headphones are overrated too. I'm sensitive to treble, but I rather have somewhat harsh highs than the boring, unnatural, and lifeless dark sound.

 

[extrabigmehdi]

Quote:

The Sennheiser HD 555 is the worst supposedly good cheaper headphone I have owned. It wasn't really dark sounding to me, maybe slightly, but I found them quite poor for their price but they were better than the headphones that I had before. The entire spectrum is grainy. Midrange was funky, lacked treble energy and sub-bass. Lacked detail, instruments lacked definition and the list goes on. I can't hear what others thought were good about them. I think the HD 600 and HD 650 are also overrated. Both sounded kind of dark and somewhat slow, especially the HD 650. Detail and clarity wasn't what I expected from headphones at those prices, they sound better than what I have but I would not buy them as I don't find them worth their price at all.

Perhaps you are experiment the famous "senneheiser veil" ? Then you'd see lot of sennheiser fan explaining that with a better source and amp, and miraculously everything would sound better.
I remind how I was disappointed when I went from the cheap sony mdr-x100 to the hd595, I was expecting more improvements.
At least there's a great soundstage you can't deny , although that's not my top priority.
 
 
Quote:

I rather have somewhat harsh highs than the boring, unnatural, and lifeless dark sound.

Maybe the hd800 would be of your taste. You definitely have more treble, although it's almost unable to sound harsh.
Always smooth, smooth, sometimes you are wondering were any aggressiveness  from the music is  gone.
 
 
There's the hd700 I didn't hear, with peaks on treble, and able of sounding harsh,  so perhaps it would be more engaging, even if less hi-fi.
 
 
Meanwhile I have the  must cheaper srh940, really able to unleash the treble, and is fast.

 

[Balgheet]

Quote:

For me, it's most definitely the M50s. I loved them when I first heard them but ended up selling them 3 days after I bought them because they gave me headaches and the overall sound signature just sounded "off" to me. Despite this, they're constantly recommended and praised by others.
 

I was going to say M50s 

 
I'll say any given pair of Grado headphones. They're entirely too popular for the little amount of sound they deliver. Design is nice though.

 

[kman1211]

I think I notice the Sennheiser veil very well. The HD 600 and HD 650 were both recabled and on a good amp and sources, but what I didn't like about them was still there even though they sounded a lot better from the amp. Yeah, soundstage was the only good thing about the HD 555, everything else was mediocre.
 
 
Maybe I will like the HD 800, I will have a chance to listen to them and basically all of the uber phones sometime next year. I should probably give shures a shot sometime. I'm in the market for an open headphone now, but I'll eventually look for a good closed can. I'm thinking I may actually like somewhat aggressive treble. I'm debating between the AKG Q701 and the Beyerdynamic DT 990 Premium 600 Ohm, I can get both around $200. I'm debating whether I would like a more neutral phone or a more aggressive funner phone more.

 

[Ishcabible]

I was going to say M50s :mad:

I'll say any given pair of Grado headphones. They're entirely too popular for the little amount of sound they deliver. Design is nice though.

Which ones have you actually heard?

 

[Sycho]

Maybe I am just too adapted to the sound of my M50s and HD 598, but the Monoprice 8323 are not even close to what people explain them as. Their lows are tolerable to an extent, but their highs sound so bad. They sound like $15 headphones with a slightly more full sound, yet distorting highs.
 
The Brainwavz R1 are torture in my ears. They sound very recessed, overly bassy, sibilant, and thin. I simply cannot agree with anyone telling me that those headphones are good for it's price at all, especially when some people say that it performs at the level of the M5s, which were considered better than the Image S4s. Not as sibilant as the Image S4s, but not even close to sounding as full and wide-ranged.

 

[penmarker]

Quote:

I think I notice the Sennheiser veil very well. The HD 600 and HD 650 were both recabled and on a good amp and sources, but what I didn't like about them was still there even though they sounded a lot better from the amp. Yeah, soundstage was the only good thing about the HD 555, everything else was mediocre.
 
 
Maybe I will like the HD 800, I will have a chance to listen to them and basically all of the uber phones sometime next year. I should probably give shures a shot sometime. I'm in the market for an open headphone now, but I'll eventually look for a good closed can. I'm thinking I may actually like somewhat aggressive treble. I'm debating between the AKG Q701 and the Beyerdynamic DT 990 Premium 600 Ohm, I can get both around $200. I'm debating whether I would like a more neutral phone or a more aggressive funner phone more.

Sounds like you, my friend, would need a speaker setup instead of a headphone. It's near impossible to reproduce the signature of the many speakers, woofers, and tweeters speaker setups has in a small driver - be it dynamic or orthodynamic.

 

[Brooko]

Quote:

I was going to say M50s 

 
I'll say any given pair of Grado headphones. They're entirely too popular for the little amount of sound they deliver. Design is nice though.

 
Quote:

Which ones have you actually heard?

 
I'd suggest he's heard very few (if any).  He just tried to troll the Grado appreciation thread with a similar comment ......
 
 

I don't mean to be that guy that hates everything but... The only good thing about Grado headphones is style and maybe comfort. Also dunno what a fan club would accomplish... Unless you shared deals where you could get cheap Grado headphones and maybe sold a few yourselves.

 
Sad when you get people like this who have nothing better to do.  If he keeps it up, I'll report him.  I have no problem if he genuinely doesn't like the Grado range (a lot of people don't) - but purposely trolling an appreciation thread?

 

[Pianist]

Quote:

I have to agree on the HM5 and all the clones it has. It's a really dark headphone, it has a slight dip in the lower midrange, massive dip in the treble and the whole treble range rolled-off, they are not neutral or flat, they are dark and muffled. EQing them does help but it still sounds unnatural. I would say they are quite overrated. I'm never going to buy from hype again and I know to avoid dark headphones like the plague now. The Sennheiser HD 555 is the worst supposedly good cheaper headphone I have owned. It wasn't really dark sounding to me, maybe slightly, but I found them quite poor for their price but they were better than the headphones that I had before. The entire spectrum is grainy. Midrange was funky, lacked treble energy and sub-bass. Lacked detail, instruments lacked definition and the list goes on. I can't hear what others thought were good about them. I think the HD 600 and HD 650 are also overrated. Both sounded kind of dark and somewhat slow, especially the HD 650. Detail and clarity wasn't what I expected from headphones at those prices, they sound better than what I have but I would not buy them as I don't find them worth their price at all. Something seemed missing from their sound that I can't put my finger on, same with the other Senns I have listened to as well as the HM5s. So far Sennheiser is not for me and they are quite overpriced in my experience, so I would say from my experience that Sennheiser is overrated, they aren't bad or anything, I just didn't find them all that great for their price, I liked the HD 280 and HD 380 but still something seemed lacking from both and I think they are both overpriced. I think dark headphones are overrated too. I'm sensitive to treble, but I rather have somewhat harsh highs than the boring, unnatural, and lifeless dark sound.

 
Well, I haven't tried HM5, but I owned FA-003 which, from what I read, should be identical to HM5. I found FA-003 to be neutral to slightly hot in the upper mids through treble. In no way are they dark sounding. Makes me wonder if we are really discussing the same headphones here. Also, perhaps your sources are lacking, not the headphones. What are you driving your 'phones with? From my experience, Sennheiser cans in particular tend to require at least decent sources to sound right.
 
 
Quote:

I feel like if anything most Shures are underrated. Their style factor hovers around zero, so they never get quite as much attention as the headphones that have both style and sound (Beyer, AKG, boutique wood stuff, etc.). This tends to be Shure's trademark across all of its product lines though. IMO they have the best price/quality ratio in both headphones and microphones but man is their marketing/style approach dry....

 
To each their own. I find Shure SRH840 and 1840 quite nice looking cans.

 

[TwoTrack]

Sennheiser HD800
AKG701
AKG240 or 241

 

[extrabigmehdi]

Quote:

Sennheiser HD800
AKG701
AKG240 or 241

What have you heard better than the hd800 ? Unless you meant  overpriced ...

 

[Pianist]

Quote:

What have you heard better than the hd800 ? Unless you meant  overpriced ...

 
HD800 is fantastic, but some find them too bright. I am on the fence on this one - sometimes I find them bright and at other times, I think they are about perfectly balanced. It really depends on the mood, music, listening preferences, sources, HRTF among other things. Objectively, they measure really, really well though - among the very best.

 

[kman1211]

Quote:

 
Well, I haven't tried HM5, but I owned FA-003 which, from what I read, should be identical to HM5. I found FA-003 to be neutral to slightly hot in the upper mids through treble. In no way are they dark sounding. Makes me wonder if we are really discussing the same headphones here. Also, perhaps your sources are lacking, not the headphones. What are you driving your 'phones with? From my experience, Sennheiser cans in particular tend to require at least decent sources to sound right.
 

Looking at the frequency response graph on the Brainwavz HM5 and the FA-003, they are clearly dark and the dips I mentioned on the frequency show on the graph as well. To my ears the graph is really accurate. Maybe my sources are lacking, I don't have anything special as I'm on a tight budget and can't spare much on headphones or amps or DACs. All I have is a FiiO E11 and a Asus Xonar DX. None of my headphones are hard to drive though. The HD 600 and HD 650 I listened to were on very good systems, so I don't think the or amp was the problem but rather the headphones don't suit my tastes. So far AKG have suited my tastes the most as I'm quite happy with the pair I have, but I am looking for an upgrade. I haven't tried Beyerdynamic yet, so I can't comment on them. All I know is for me is to stay away from the HD 5xx and 6xx series Senns.

 

[Pianist]

Quote:

Looking at the frequency response graph on the Brainwavz HM5 and the FA-003, they are clearly dark and the dips I mentioned on the frequency show on the graph as well. To my ears the graph is really accurate. Maybe my sources are lacking, I don't have anything special as I'm on a tight budget and can't spare much on headphones or amps or DACs. All I have is a FiiO E11 and a Asus Xonar DX. None of my headphones are hard to drive though. The HD 600 and HD 650 I listened to were on very good systems, so I don't think the or amp was the problem but rather the headphones don't suit my tastes. So far AKG have suited my tastes the most as I'm quite happy with the pair I have, but I am looking for an upgrade. I haven't tried Beyerdynamic yet, so I can't comment on them. All I know is for me is to stay away from the HD 5xx and 6xx series Senns.

 
Which graphs were you looking at? Here are a couple that I found for FA-003:
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/FischerAudioFA003.pdf
http://www.doctorhead.ru/catalogue/?i=1297
 
As you can see on these graphs, apart from the notch between 7-8 kHz, FA-003 has a pretty even to slightly bright response in the treble region. I found them a bit hot sounding at times and somewhat cold due to the dip in the upper bass/lower midrange. They also sound a bit closed in and the dip in the mid treble does make the leading edges of cymbals and some other sounds feel muted. But I can't call this headphone dark. Here's an example of a dark, yet well regarded headphone.
 
I do like AKGs very much as well and I understand why many find their sound signature more appealing than that of Sennheisers. In particular, I hold K701/2/Q701 headphones in very high regard and I would love to have one of these alongside my current cans for times when I want something more upfront and exciting. AKGs do tend to sound more lively and arguably more realistic than Senns do, but they may also come off as harsh and thin depending on tastes, sources, etc. I can't say I prefer either company's philosophy. I think both approaches work well, but in different ways and it's nice to have variety.

 

[kman1211]

Quote:

 
Which graphs were you looking at? Here are a couple that I found for FA-003:
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/FischerAudioFA003.pdf
http://www.doctorhead.ru/catalogue/?i=1297
 
As you can see on these graphs, apart from the notch between 7-8 kHz, FA-003 has a pretty even to slightly bright response in the treble region. I found them a bit hot sounding at times and somewhat cold due to the dip in the upper bass/lower midrange. They also sound a bit closed in and the dip in the mid treble does make the leading edges of cymbals and some other sounds feel muted. But I can't call this headphone dark. Here's an example of a dark, yet well regarded headphone.
 
I do like AKGs very much as well and I understand why many find their sound signature more appealing than that of Sennheisers. AKGs do sound more lively and arguably more realistic than Senns do, but they may also come off as harsh and thin depending on tastes, sources, etc. I can't say I prefer either company's philosophy. I think both approaches work well, but in different ways and it's nice to have variety.

The inner fidelity graph, the whole treble looks slightly recessed to me. Maybe it's not the darkness that bothers me but something else, I am still a novice head-fier, but something clearly bothers me about their sound. I don't know what it is but they sound poor to me somewhat muffled, unnatural tone, etc. I could simply be realizing I'm a treblehead.
 
I see, I found AKGs to be exactly that compared to Sennheiser, lively and natural. Sennheiser sounds dull and unnatural to me. I simply don't find Senns musical. I want to be engaged in the music but also have enough detail so I can analyze the music. How is the Beyer sound compared to the AKG sound?