[DjAmTraX]

These sound like mini Sennheiser HD-800, very open with better bass.
 

 

 

 

[Graphicism]

Interesting, I called it when the Senn 800s were introduced. The Sony SA5000s are some of my favorite headphones, although I thought they were rather bass-light, I could not imagine a HD800 if that is indeed the case. How do you find they compare to your DT990?

 

[Ikarios]

How does the bass compare to your HD600s?

 

[Kassem]

I borrowed a pair of these from a fellow headfier virometal one time.  They were great.  Very quick and airy.  I enjoyed them tremendously.  I would love to hear them again, now that I've heard a few other things.

 

[redrich2000]

I have a pair of these and have recently been comparing them to some borrowed HD-650s (w- equinox), K702s and W5000s. On the right recording, the Sony's are superior to all of them. But they are very prone to sibilance and excessive treble on a lot of recordings. I find myself considering replacing the Sony's for the Senns cause they work better with a wider range of material. The AKG are like a poor version of the Sony's, they have same weaknesses but the Sony's have better at detail, speed, air and soundstaging.
 
The W5000s are the big surprise. They have a lot of the detail and speed of the Sony's but without the tendency to sibilance. Their weakness though is a weird fit that makes them feel loose and heavy on your head.
Why can't these engineers just make perfect headphones?

 

[sokolov91]

Bass is not better than HD 800 in anyway... unless you are looking for something supremely rolled off... The HD 800 get to 20hz with 3dB roll off. The SA5K don't get to 20hz and roll of by 30dB before that.
 
If anything the HD 800 is a "fixed" SA5K with much flatter bass response, huge soundstage instead of a more upfront sound, and non fatiguing treble, or at least much less so than the SA5k which are treble heavy in all senses of the word.
 
Nonetheless an impressive headphone that has a great design and is quite comfy... especially at the asking price.

 

[Ikarios]

Quote:

I have a pair of these and have recently been comparing them to some borrowed HD-650s (w- equinox), K702s and W5000s. On the right recording, the Sony's are superior to all of them. But they are very prone to sibilance and excessive treble on a lot of recordings. I find myself considering replacing the Sony's for the Senns cause they work better with a wider range of material. The AKG are like a poor version of the Sony's, they have same weaknesses but the Sony's have better at detail, speed, air and soundstaging.
 
The W5000s are the big surprise. They have a lot of the detail and speed of the Sony's but without the tendency to sibilance. Their weakness though is a weird fit that makes them feel loose and heavy on your head.
Why can't these engineers just make perfect headphones?

because if they made perfect headphones they'd have nothing left to sell

 
Incidentally how do you think the bass compared to the K702s? I've been wondering about the SA5000 for a little while, since a lot of people compare them to the 701/702. It's hard to find a concensus as to which one is better, though, and different people will say the bass is better and others will say it is worse.

 

[sokolov91]

Quote:

Quote:

I have a pair of these and have recently been comparing them to some borrowed HD-650s (w- equinox), K702s and W5000s. On the right recording, the Sony's are superior to all of them. But they are very prone to sibilance and excessive treble on a lot of recordings. I find myself considering replacing the Sony's for the Senns cause they work better with a wider range of material. The AKG are like a poor version of the Sony's, they have same weaknesses but the Sony's have better at detail, speed, air and soundstaging.
 
The W5000s are the big surprise. They have a lot of the detail and speed of the Sony's but without the tendency to sibilance. Their weakness though is a weird fit that makes them feel loose and heavy on your head.
Why can't these engineers just make perfect headphones?

because if they made perfect headphones they'd have nothing left to sell

 
Incidentally how do you think the bass compared to the K702s? I've been wondering about the SA5000 for a little while, since a lot of people compare them to the 701/702. It's hard to find a concensus as to which one is better, though, and different people will say the bass is better and others will say it is worse.

The AKG 70X are definitely less rolled off than the SA5K. Which one you like better is up to your ears.
 

 

[DjAmTraX]

I like the SA5000 much more than the K702.

 

[Graphicism]

Yeah I wouldn't pay too much attention to headphone graphs. I definitely found the SA fuller sounding than the K701.

 

[redrich2000]

 
 

 
Incidentally how do you think the bass compared to the K702s? I've been wondering about the SA5000 for a little while, since a lot of people compare them to the 701/702. It's hard to find a concensus as to which one is better, though, and different people will say the bass is better and others will say it is worse.

 
I find this difficult to answer. To my ears the 702 has somewhat more upper bass quantity and being slower, has a smoothness that the SA5000 doesn't. But the SA5000s speed and detail makes me feel it produces better quality bass. I see no reason to keep the 702 over the SA5000.
 
Sadly the HD800 is well out of my price range so I will have to choose between the SA5000 and the HD650. At the moment I am leaning towards keeping the SA5000 and seeing down the track whether I have the inclination and money to get a HD650 as well. I tend to view my main system as set up to bring the very best out of very good recordings. Poorer recording that make me want a HD650 can be enjoyed out of a portable with my RE0s
 

 

[Kubernetes]

They are certainly built lovely.  They look like a more modern MDR-F1.

 

[sokolov91]

Graphs don't tell all but headphones either do 20hz or they do not. For everything graphs fail to communicate (which is generally falsely attributed to the graph itself and not the pair of ears refuting the graph which while fair is besides the point) they communicate a lot.
 
The SA5K are notorious for being treble heavy and basslight -which the graph says. They are notorious for "speed" and the drivers reach up to 100khz and the square wave plots are horrible which, unless I am mistaken, show the inability to sustain notes which makes them sound overdampened/quick. Just all depends on how people want to look at things really.
 
To some the lack of bass makes them clear, detailed, revealing etc. To others it makes them bright, fatiguing, coloured, anemic, cold.
 
Just two sides to the same coin and the graph backs both up. The FR (basslight/treble heavy) graph is backed up by the square wave plot (ringing/overshoot undershoot which means overemphasized highs), which is then backed up by my ears (which are experienced and young

) and finally backed up my comparisons to other headphones (with test tones and songs) that have been shown to be much better in the bass by the same graphs (HD 800, LCD-2, HE-6). When you approach things in a systematic way, graphs can show lots.
 
Just never guarantees you that you will like something, which is the fatal flow and why auditioning is so important.  They also don't explain the ridiculous terms people apply to certain sounds or headphones either, but that game is so complex probably nothing will explain it other than hi-fi maddness