Neumann NDH 30

[Satriany]

Although the NDH 30 is explicitly aimed at professional clients, we were interested in comparing them with a headphone from the audiophile camp, such as the Sennheiser HD 660 S. Both models sounded wonderfully open and spacious, reproducing the midrange coherently and reaching deep down into the bass range. In my opinion, however, the NDH 30 ultimately comes out on top, although they cost more. Sennheiser’s HD 800 S is considerably more expensive. It relies on a leaner tuning with a treble emphasis that results in an impressive detail resolution and airiness that the NDH 30 can’t match. And Sendy Audio’s magnetostatic Peacock also justifies its more than doubled price in terms of further enhanced spaciousness.

However, this does not detract from the very good results of the NDH 30, but merely shows that there should still be room at Neumann for an even higher-quality model.

Is the hd800s too bright or does the ndh30 fall a bit short in the highs?

 

[Mike F]

Is the hd800s too bright or does the ndh30 fall a bit short in the highs?

Depends on:- the music, the source, the amp/DAC, your preferences, and your ears. For me the HD800 is often too bright, and the NDH 30 does not fall short in the highs.

 

[headstef]

I think he has a style to get teenager audience.
Anyway this was one of the few reviews I found.
Any measurements published ? On my morphit version there is only the ndh20...
Hd6xx hd650 rolls of fast in the upper region, it needs quite a lot of eq which is not ideal. I like the crisp of violins and the sustain of cymbals

I am astonished that you think the HD-650 needs quite a lot of EQ to raise the upper region! I have always perceived it very well balanced there and very natural. Maybe you are used to bright headphones. However, if you feel it rolls of fast, you may feel the same with the NDH 30. Still, the NDH 30 is considerably more revealing and natural than the HD-650 across the whole spectrum (treble too).

 

[headstef]

I agree, it’s a chameleon. Just like their speaker equivalent (KH 310), bad recordings sound awful and good recordings sound amazing.

It’s one of the reasons I keep the 660S2 purely because it handles shoddy recordings a lot better.

BTW I highly recommended playing a few intense FPS games like Squad, Ready or Not and Insurgency: Sandstorm. They sound incredibly visceral on the NDH 30, especially with that subwoofer like impact, I need to be careful not to accidentally get PTSD!

A very strange thing happens with lesser recordings when I listen to them with the NDH 30: Though I am immediately aware of their low quality and all their shortcomings are very apparent, I still enjoy their music more than with other headphones! It is hard to explain, maybe it is their pros that become very apparent too. I am often puzzled by this. The NDH 30 has a musicality and engaging factor that is very special.
Right now I am listening to some monophonic recordings from the sixties (greek music, Stavros Xarchakos, a composer that I adore), that sound very real and emotional. They were not bad recordings though, just not up to later standards.

 

[headstef]

Hello. I know that everyone's long-used or most recently purchased headphones are the best, and they are very biased, even if they don't perform as they say. is there an ndh30 owner here who can speak objectively about it? please mention what dac/amplifier is used in this review, because it matters a lot. first of all, I would be interested in the strengths and weaknesses of the ndh30, because there are no perfect headphones. I heard that the ndh30 is weak in terms of dynamics and slam, impact. this is his weakest point. how is it technically in other areas? resolution, separation, stage, imaging? e.g. compared to an HD650/6xx, whose frequency curve is also so perfect. I would also be interested in the depth and impact of the sub bass. because it would also behave great with a 120ohm OTL amplifier?

If you can take the time to read this thread you'll discover that this headphone is a real gem, to the point that it is hard to believe without personal listening. Extremely resolving without being bright, finely balanced, extending down to the lowest sub-bass with admirable bass detail and control, very neutral, very engaging and life-like, doing justice to the finest recordings. Comfortable and very well made too. A headphone that could really have any price.
You can pair it with the finest electronics to appreciate the sonic heights that it can reach.
You can also laugh reading how suspiciously many approach this headphone and all "hype" posts about it, only to become very happy users soon, posting about its rare superiority.

 

[Plieb]

Hello. I know that everyone's long-used or most recently purchased headphones are the best, and they are very biased, even if they don't perform as they say. is there an ndh30 owner here who can speak objectively about it? please mention what dac/amplifier is used in this review, because it matters a lot. first of all, I would be interested in the strengths and weaknesses of the ndh30, because there are no perfect headphones. I heard that the ndh30 is weak in terms of dynamics and slam, impact. this is his weakest point. how is it technically in other areas? resolution, separation, stage, imaging? e.g. compared to an HD650/6xx, whose frequency curve is also so perfect. I would also be interested in the depth and impact of the sub bass. because it would also behave great with a 120ohm OTL amplifier?

Ok just received the phone yesterday. These are my initial thoughts. Please note that as you are aware the DAC amp combo can make all the difference in the world.
My findings so far are based on using the Rebel class A amp, and my underated THX monoprice 887. Using ess9038 dac chip. Overall sound is very rich and extremely smooth sounding. Great balance of all frequencies. I would say on my equipment it is even more listenable than my 6xx.
Was a bit disappointed that it was too bass heavy and slight veiling with the Rebel but sounded just right with my THX.
I would agree that if there are any negatives it would be with regard to dynamics and punch/slam. Also at very loud levels some recordings can be a bit boomy in the bass. I don't find the bass as tight and detailed as my senn S2 or my focal elex. However the bass really feels deep. Vocals are pushed back a bit and can sound a bit bland on certain recordings. But that creamy sound is very enticing.
Not a bright headphone but just the right amount of bite on most recordings.
Just listened to Stravinsky and was blown away.
The phone sounds similar to the 6xx but more balanced with deeper bass and better detail. With regard to sound stage,seperation and imaging it was good but didn't stand out for me.
I have the Singxer sa1 but need to buy a balanced cable. Can't wait to try it on that amp. I think it can be a great combo.
Very satisfied with purchase.

Update nov 16....
Using balanced on my singxer is by far the best.
Let me also say that after 7 mos i can now safely say that the imaging, soundstage, and overall spaciousness is without question superior to 6xx and excluding imaging better than 660s.

 

[Satriany]

I am astonished that you think the HD-650 needs quite a lot of EQ to raise the upper region! I have always perceived it very well balanced there and very natural. Maybe you are used to bright headphones. However, if you feel it rolls of fast, you may feel the same with the NDH 30. Still, the NDH 30 is considerably more revealing and natural than the HD-650 across the whole spectrum (treble too).

Well I don't know I have a 3 way active system which I tune and measure myself and it does have compression drivers, they give a lot of energy and realism with cymbals.
I bought several headphones also to check what I measure or hear is not incorrect.
The only one which was close to the system was the heddphone, but I didn't keep it because it was expensive and not really a headphone in terms of practical use.
The used hd6xx I have is much more laid back. Maybe it is this unit, don't know.
I also have a k702 which seems closer in upper mids and highs.
But the realism in terms of energy and sustain is the best on the faital hf108r and its horn.
Now that I have almost finished my system I want to keep only one headphone.

 

[Satriany]

Here are some curves from Morphit.

Of course it does not tell you how it sounds, phase and impulse response or waterfall is important. we know that K702 has better waterfall than hd650 for example.

Maybe it is because of the technology but I understand it is always difficult in the top end.

 

[Satriany]

But stock this ndh30 are very good in terms of freq resp up to 8-10 khz !

 

[Mike F]

Remarkably similar treble response to the HD650, but with perfect bass.

 

[headstef]

But stock this ndh30 are very good in terms of freq resp up to 8-10 khz !

You can see measurements with miniDSP Ears in post #139 (comparison with HD-650), also some more comments and measurements a few pages later.

 

[OkPsychology]

A very strange thing happens with lesser recordings when I listen to them with the NDH 30: Though I am immediately aware of their low quality and all their shortcomings are very apparent, I still enjoy their music more than with other headphones! It is hard to explain, maybe it is their pros that become very apparent too. I am often puzzled by this. The NDH 30 has a musicality and engaging factor that is very special.
Right now I am listening to some monophonic recordings from the sixties (greek music, Stavros Xarchakos, a composer that I adore), that sound very real and emotional. They were not bad recordings though, just not up to later standards.

This is very interesting to me, because I tend to have the opposite reaction. When a poorly recorded/mixed/mastered track comes on when I'm using the Neumann, I immediately have the urge to grab the 660S2. They're good stablemates, these two. The NDH30 is without a doubt the less forgiving of the two, but sometimes I need a break from the immediacy and intensity of it, and the Senny really gives you a smoother, gentler presentation that I've come to love. Also, no other headphone beats the comfort of the HD600-series form factor, and I really appreciate how not-clunky they are. They're the best-wearing can in existence, IMO.

 

[Satriany]

You can see measurements with miniDSP Ears in post #139 (comparison with HD-650), also some more comments and measurements a few pages later.

I had a look thanks. They look too good to me, looking at the minidsp manual it seems they compensate a lot of things.
Anyway this was not to create a polemic.
For example I think that the Harman curve really sucks all the finesse with this rolloff in the end.
Other topic and measurements
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/new-neumann-ndh30-coming.33643/page-4
Compared to hd600 which is known for its mids and highs qualities


https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...s/new-neumann-ndh30-coming.33643/post-1312111

This guy does apply an amount of eq to boost the highs. Don't know his reputation.

 

[Mike F]

This is very interesting to me, because I tend to have the opposite reaction. When a poorly recorded/mixed/mastered track comes on when I'm using the Neumann, I immediately have the urge to grab the 660S2. They're good stablemates, these two. The NDH30 is without a doubt the less forgiving of the two, but sometimes I need a break from the immediacy and intensity of it, and the Senny really gives you a smoother, gentler presentation that I've come to love. Also, no other headphone beats the comfort of the HD600-series form factor, and I really appreciate how not-clunky they are. They're the best-wearing can in existence, IMO.

I would agree. The problem with revealing gear has always been that poor recording are less enjoyable because they are shown to be what they are - poor recordings. As as studio monitor guy (PCM and ATC in different systems) I’ve always gravitated towards accuracy over ‘warmth’, which so often (but not always) means distortion. As a musician playing acoustic instruments I prefer to hear things as they are as far as possible. So here is a question; if I want to grab another headphone than the NDH 30 on occasion for a more relaxed listen, is there any good reason in your opinion why I should splash €600 on the S2 when I already have the 650 and 660S? In other words, if I’m willing to sacrifice the technical abilities of the NDH 30 for something which smooths out the rough edges of a poor recording, is there something special about that S2 that really justifies it over the 650 and 660S?

 

[headstef]

I had a look thanks. They look too good to me, looking at the minidsp manual it seems they compensate a lot of things.
Anyway this was not to create a polemic.
For example I think that the Harman curve really sucks all the finesse with this rolloff in the end.
Other topic and measurements
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/new-neumann-ndh30-coming.33643/page-4
Compared to hd600 which is known for its mids and highs qualities


https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...s/new-neumann-ndh30-coming.33643/post-1312111

This guy does apply an amount of eq to boost the highs. Don't know his reputation.

The Harman curve "demands" from headphones to have somewhat raised mid-treble (and bass) to measure "flat". Thus, when rather natural sounding headphones are measured and compensated for Harman curve, they can appear dull or a little lacking in mid-treble. This is true for many models with natural (or relatively natural) treble like the NDH 30, the Focal Clear MG (and OG), the HD-600/650. On the contrary there are models that follow precisely the Harman curve in treble, like the Meze 109 Pro, but almost one third of their users complain or comment for overexposed treble and search for ways to tame it. (Some send it back eventually for this reason). Reading other threads too, for headphones that follow the treble demanding Harman curve (some magnetic planars), you can see that many like them as they are but also many comment about treble being over the top and unnatural. No one finds them dark in treble, anyway. This little statistic tells me that Harman complying headphones are often percieved as rather bright by users but never as dark. My conclusion after all these is that for many (or most?) users a headphone must be a little less bright than the Harman curve demands, to sound natural and life-like in this region. Also, this happens to agree with my own experience with my current hearing. Of course, some will not agree with these findings or the above statistic. (Oratory1990 is very experienced and also one of those who seem to like their headphones being a little on the bright side, Harman like. Crinacle, too).

Ed: revisiting some graphs and comments of the above two reviewers I see that I cannot really generalize about their preferences since my observations apply on some of their reviews/measurements but not on some others.