[LarsHP]

The two graphs are aligned at 1kHz. That's how they are done at HeadRoom (and InnerFidelity).
 
If you take that into account and lower the new graph to merge with the old in the bass and mids, then the new will have less output from 1kHz to about 5kHz, then higher output from about 7kHz to 10-11kHz and then again less from 12kHz to 16-17kHz. All in all the new graph is less even than the old.

 

[mironathetin]

Now I have read the whole thread. Indeed, there are hints that all HD800 sound alike, as Sennheiser suggests.
 
May I add a note: If you believe in break-in,  it is pointless to get the frequency diagrams from Sennheiser, like many of you did. By definition, Sennheiser has recorded them before break-in.
The Sennheiser diagrams have a bad scale too. Its very hard to see anything from them.
 
Quote:

 
Thats interesting. How is the break-in time of these two models? Similar?
I just contacted the Sennheiser customer service in germany and asked them, if they technologically changed the HD800 after the price was raised. 
 
They answered that they did not change anything (except the price).
So these differences are astonishing and the question should be: could it be due to break-in time?
Is there any consensus among the owners of both models about differences?

 

[Xelor]

Nope, the three HD800 I've tested are all slightly different. Same sound signature of course but different.

 

[arnaud]

Quote:

The two graphs are aligned at 1kHz. That's how they are done at HeadRoom (and InnerFidelity).
 
If you take that into account and lower the new graph to merge with the old in the bass and mids, then the new will have less output from 1kHz to about 5kHz, then higher output from about 7kHz to 10-11kHz and then again less from 12kHz to 16-17kHz. All in all the new graph is less even than the old.

 
Which is a reason why they should normalize their graphs by loudness instead of level at 1kHz for such comparison purposes. Computing stationary loudness is not rocket science but somehow it's not very well known even being one of the most basic parameters used in quantitative sound quality evaluation.
 
I guess one issue is that we're not listening to white noise so it's difficult to assess the perceived loudness for the average bloke listening to music. But still, we'd be much better off with such normalization than the 250/500/1kHz curve crossing.

 

[mironathetin]

Quote:

Nope, the three HD800 I've tested are all slightly different. Same sound signature of course but different.

Could you be more specific, please?
Are you talking about normal variance among models or do you think Sennheiser lied to us and changed parts and technology?

 

[Xelor]

Quote:

Could you be more specific, please?
Are you talking about normal variance among models or do you think Sennheiser lied to us and changed parts and technology?

post #172 

 

[mironathetin]

Quote:

15xxx (burned-in): 
18xxx (new not burned-in):
20xxx (new not burned-in): 
 
(...)
 
These are all very subtle differences. Not easy to listen to the differences. 

So its model spread mixed with psycho-acoustics and burn-in differences. 

 

[LarsHP]

 
Light blue is the 2013 graph, dark blue the original graph. I aligned the curves instead of using the default 1kHz point. The new graph shows variances of 1-2dB except in the treble. At 9kHz the new graph shows 6dBs more than the old. This hopefully isn't production differences only.

 

[dleblanc343]

Quote:

 
Light blue is the 2013 graph, dark blue the original graph. I aligned the curves instead of using the default 1kHz point. The new graph shows variances of 1-2dB except in the treble. At 9kHz the new graph shows 6dBs more than the old. This hopefully isn't production differences only.

It's most likely small measurement differences. A slight change in the positioning or angling of the headphone on the dummy head can change the sound.

 

[Xelor]

Quote:

So its model spread mixed with psycho-acoustics and burn-in differences. 

 
No big issue there, you could hear by yourself, I'm pretty confident you will hear the same differences.
I'm using a 20xxx and its overall better for my taste, slightly better bass. I sold the 18xxx and kept the 15xxx 'cause it is similar to the 20xxx but not as detailed.

 

[LarsHP]

As far as I remember, Tyll Hertsens at Inner Fidelity says that the HD800 measures remarkably consistent when he remeasures it (again and again).

I am open to the idea that there isn't a new production, but the extra output from 6 - 12kHz is actually a whole octave with clearly more treble, and this makes me wonder.

 

[dleblanc343]

Quote:

As far as I remember, Tyll Hertsens at Inner Fidelity says that the HD800 measures remarkably consistent when he remeasures it (again and again).

I am open to the idea that there isn't a new production, but the extra output from 6 - 12kHz is actually a whole octave with clearly more treble, and this makes me wonder.

I guess I agree with what Tyll said. I've heard over 8 different HD800's and directly compared 4 and can't discern much. However, I've heard slight differences between three HE6's (mine, a coworker's and another Head-fi friend's), as well as two different sounding LCD3's (both RMA's).
 
I'd be inclined to say the HD800's had a bit of a mismatched measurement in this case.

 

[arnaud]

Quote:

It's most likely small measurement differences. A slight change in the positioning or angling of the headphone on the dummy head can change the sound.

 
This.

 

[LarsHP]

If that's the case, then it doesn't fit with Tyll Hertsens experience remeasuring the same HD800 again and again, getting very close graphs every time.

 

[arnaud]

Tyll is wise enough to make averages of 5 slightly different seating positions. The average is consistent, the individual runs not necessarily.

Lastly, you're bound to see variations in these 1/12 Octave Band responses at high frequency between production runs, even the 1/3 (or is it 1/1?) individual calibration charts provided by sennheiser show variations across units.