REVIEW: Sennheiser HD 800
Jul 5, 2009 at 12:31 AM Post #331 of 632
Quote:

Originally Posted by TempestX /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Question to all of you attacking Skylab. If you own an HD 800, have your own equipment, several sources, several amps, and other headphones going to start your own thread, your own review, and quit messing up this thread? Several of you had your HD 800's before Skylab received a pair to evaluate. Are you scared of what others would say?

We all hear differently period.


Happy listening!



Well, I didn't attack Skylab, but I did post my own review, which people are more than welcome to respond to. I don't think many (any?) of the responses to his review were intended as "attacks". Some people agreed with him in whole and some expressed where they disagreed. I don't think any of this "messed up the thread".

The purpose, to me, of submitting a review is a) self-expression, b) to impart information and c) to provoke thought and stimulate response. Skylab did this, which is a testament to his fine review.
 
Jul 5, 2009 at 1:15 AM Post #332 of 632
Quote:

Originally Posted by feifan /img/forum/go_quote.gif
OK. Here's a mini-review of the HD800's dynamics:

Equipment: HeadRoom Desktop maxed (Oct '06) + DPS; computer as source via USB; WAV files.

Test tracks: The free download sampler that was available from HDtracks, which included five tracks: (1) “The Snow Maiden: Dance of the Tumblers” from Exotic Dances from the Opera, Eiji Oue and the Minnesota Orchestra, 1996, Reference Recordings; (2) “Lucia” from Entre Cada Palabra (courtesy of Chesky Records). Marta Gomez, 2005, Chesky Records; (3) “Big Bad Girl” from Louisiana Country Boy, Harry “Big Daddy” Hypolite, 2001, Analogue Productions; (4) “Misery” from Unauthorized, Dave’s True Story, 2000, Chesky Records; (5) “Mozart Violin Concerto in G Major KV216” from Mozart Violin Concertos, Marianne Thorsen and the TrondheimSolistene, 2006, Lindberg Lyd AS.

In terms of dynamics, the HD800 is extremely revealing, especially in the soft passages, e.g., tracks 1, 2, 3. At pianissimo, my first instinct was to crank up the volume. But that resulted in instant irritability and rapid fatigue caused by crescendo. Returning the volume to a comfortable level (12 o'clock), I realized that the HD800 is extremely revealing all the way down to pp. Even at the softest, the accuracy and clarity is amazing.

The HD800 is revealing throughout the spectrum -- lows, mids, and highs. It's accurate from mezzo-piano through piano and pp. Diminuendo and perdendo are clear and smooth as silk, completely transparent.

The price one pays for this dynamic accuracy over a wide range is a conscious effort to keep fingers away from the volume knob to get at (to amplify) the soft levels. The reward, though, is an appreciation for the nuance and beauty that's in the soft, wich is crucial to the whole arrangement. See Uncle Erik's post #240 re the importance of dynamics, written from the perspective of a performer who played "the big clarinets and tuba." His point is that low-mid-high dynamics should vary according to (or in relation to) the demands of the music.

My favorite among the five tracks is Marta Gomez's “Lucia.” This track erases any doubts that I might've had about the lyrical capacity of the HD800. When there's warmth and sweetness -- musicality -- in a track, I hear it.

In this lineup, with this content, the HD800 gives me the best dynamics, clarity, and musicality I've yet to experience.



Very nice mini-review, thanks.
 
Jul 5, 2009 at 1:31 AM Post #333 of 632
I heard my HD800 on a B22 3ch today.

I find them too flat for my tastes. I prefer them more with my SinglePower Dragon ... it's more tap foot and textured.

I prefer something flat on something colored. Flat on flat I find that boring.
 
Jul 5, 2009 at 1:32 AM Post #334 of 632
Quote:

Originally Posted by feifan /img/forum/go_quote.gif
OK. Here's a mini-review of the HD800's dynamics:


Nicely done -- and you've brought out an important point I've not seen described before -- the extraordinary dynamic range of the HD800. It can do quiet passages with a palpable hush -- but you had better be sitting in a quiet room to appreciate it -- and then give you a thrilling rush as things get loud. Especially wonderful with classical material, where such things tend to happen more.

I think this same phenomenon is why compressed recordings are especially offensive on the HD800 -- because you are viscerally presented with the knowledge that they could have been so much more. The Who's original CD of "Meaty, Beaty, Big, and Bouncy" is like that. It sounds, through the HD800, as though it's coming out of a cheap transistor radio. But the vastly-superior dynamics of "Quadrophenia" (Mobile Fidelity) are sublime.
 
Jul 5, 2009 at 2:12 AM Post #335 of 632
Quote:

Originally Posted by IPodPJ /img/forum/go_quote.gif
x2. I can't see anything I'd want to change in these, except maybe a more accurate soundstage. If they do make a bass heavy version, you can be sure they won't be called the HD850, more like the HD750. Sennheiser believes these are reference headphones, so any tweak to that would make them sub-reference, not super-reference.


I do forsee an HD695 or 795 which uses the HD800 ring driver, but is smaller and less exotic in the housing (i.e. the HD595 to the HD650) which would retail for $600 and $800 respectively.

Question for the HD800 listeners/owners, do you still get the bass at low volume levels or do you need a moderate level to get the bass to be present? I normally prefer lower listening (unforced) levels. With the K701, you need a decent level for any real bass "presence" although you do hear it at low levels.
 
Jul 5, 2009 at 2:27 AM Post #336 of 632
I've found the presentation with the HD-800s changes considerably (relative to other headphones) depending on the listening volume.
 
Jul 5, 2009 at 3:04 AM Post #337 of 632
Quote:

Originally Posted by rangen /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I think this same phenomenon is why compressed recordings are especially offensive on the HD800 -- because you are viscerally presented with the knowledge that they could have been so much more. The Who's original CD of "Meaty, Beaty, Big, and Bouncy" is like that. It sounds, through the HD800, as though it's coming out of a cheap transistor radio. But the vastly-superior dynamics of "Quadrophenia" (Mobile Fidelity) are sublime.


Rangen, you got that dead on -- "coming out of a cheap transistor radio." The HD800's unforgiving in its revelation -- truly GIGO.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beagle /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Question for the HD800 listeners/owners, do you still get the bass at low volume levels


Beagle, yes, definitely. Deep, punchy, defined, accurate -- but not in your face or up front unless the arrangement calls for the emphasis. Uncle Erik explains this beautifully in his post. We have "The Great HD800 Divide" because some (majority?) prefer their bass consistently up front and others (minority?) prefer a wider dynamic range with bass moving back and forth, soft and loud, without losing its integrity.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beagle /img/forum/go_quote.gif
or do you need a moderate level to get the bass to be present? I normally prefer lower listening (unforced) levels.


As others have said in this and other related threads, less seems to be more with the HD800. At lower levels, we get the full dynamic range of bass whether it's up front or far back. If we turn the volume up to enhance the soft bass, we end up amping the entire range, and the result is mids and highs that are irritating and even painful. I calibrate the volume on my amp by the loud mids and highs. Setting this to comfortable made the full range comfortable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beagle /img/forum/go_quote.gif
With the K701, you need a decent level for any real bass "presence" although you do hear it at low levels.


The K701 doesn't have the dynamic range of the HD800, but its neutrality is excellent. On another note, of the amps I own, at a decent level, I'm getting the most bass emphasis and definition in the K701 from the Shanling PH100. Great for rock.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I've found the presentation with the HD-800s changes considerably (relative to other headphones) depending on the listening volume.


x2, Currawong!

Quote:

Originally Posted by pompon /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I heard my HD800 on a B22 3ch today.

I find them too flat for my tastes. I prefer them more with my SinglePower Dragon ... it's more tap foot and textured.

I prefer something flat on something colored. Flat on flat I find that boring.



I found this same-same principle to be true, too. The few times I tested the combo, the HD800 just didn't synergize with the m902. I'll have to return to that lineup and futz with different variables.
 
Jul 5, 2009 at 3:09 AM Post #338 of 632
The 800's spectral balance seems to change with the volume setting more than other headphones do - higher levels give more bass, but they still aren't near as warm as say 580s/etc.

Higher levels also give more liveliness to the sound, they seem a bit dull to me if I turn them down, although too high and they get snappy on the snare (at least to me).

The are the most finicky headphones I've had regarding amp and picking the right volume (which makes it a bit of a pain, since I listen to music that has varying degrees of compression and thus loudness).

No doubt they are great headphones, jury is still out for me as to whether they are worth the price (and the price of a good amp to drive them). Probably yes, since I'm comparing them to the Stax 4070 and AKG K1000, and systems built around those aren't cheap either.

I am really curious to hear the Ultrasone 8, which is about the same price - obviously a much different headphone, but I'm surprised I haven't heard more about that one in comparison. Maybe it isn't out yet...

-- Gordie

Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I've found the presentation with the HD-800s changes considerably (relative to other headphones) depending on the listening volume.


 
Jul 5, 2009 at 3:22 AM Post #339 of 632
Quote:

Originally Posted by feifan /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I found this same-same principle to be true, too. The few times I tested the combo, the HD800 just didn't synergize with the m902. I'll have to return to that lineup and futz with different variables.


My plan is to use the m902 with the HD800 so I'm a little disappointed to read that comment. I really like the m902 with the HD600 so I will probably end up trying it anyway.
 
Jul 5, 2009 at 3:34 AM Post #340 of 632
Quote:

Originally Posted by gordie /img/forum/go_quote.gif
The 800's spectral balance seems to change with the volume setting more than other headphones do - higher levels give more bass, but they still aren't near as warm as say 580s/etc.

Higher levels also give more liveliness to the sound, they seem a bit dull to me if I turn them down, although too high and they get snappy on the snare (at least to me).



All headphones (and speakers) do this. It's natural for sound waves reaching the ear. This is why Skylab has calibrated his review to a specific volume setting, and how he calibrated to that specific level. This is why it is very important to note it.
 
Jul 5, 2009 at 4:06 AM Post #341 of 632
At times this thread has been more a review of Skylab or of reviewing in general, than it has been a review of the HD800. So let me add to the customary disclosure that I am a fan of Skylab. I should also admit that I am over 60, and my treble sensitivity is less than it once was, although my last audiologist exam showed that my hearing is well within the normal range.

For the last couple of years I have been listening primarily through UE 10s and then, when they came out, UE 11s. Some of you may scoff at the notion of IEMs for other than portable use, but I find each of them to have significantly better sound quality than my balanced HD 600, not to mention that wearing them is effortless. That is not something even the HD 800 can claim, although, thank God, unlike the HD 600, it is comfortable to wear for extended periods.

I mainly compared the HD 800 against the UE 10s, since their reputation is for being fairly neutral; the UE 11s clearly have more bass emphasis, along with an increased treble clarity that somewhat offsets the additional bass.

In all kinds of recordings, it was clear that the UE 10s had more emphasis on bass than does the HD 800. That is, on piano music such as Gilels' playing of the Pathetique sonata on DG, the lower part of the keyboard sounds louder relative to the upper registers on the UE 10s than on the HD 800. In both cases the music sounded as if it was coming from a real piano. I am inclined to say that the HD 800 was more "natural," at least to my taste. I base this on listening to a Brautigam rendition of the same piece on a fortepiano on a Bis recording. The UE 10s tended to make the fortepiano sound like piano, while the differences between the instruments were much more apparent on the HD 800. In any case I have personally come to the conclusion that I prefer the HD 800 for piano music. I feel similarly about orchestral work.

When it comes to the human voice, I think the HD 800 is the clear winner. Two CDs I happen to have in front of me, Etta James's Blues to the Bone, and Bad Influence's Love at the Bad Habits Cafe, show this clearly to me. Also, I find that on jazz and blues albums, even though the bass is relatively less loud, the clarity and naturalness of harmonicas, saxophones, etc. more than make up for it. And it is not as if the bass disappears by any means; it is just not as up front. But I can see how others might not feel the same way.

There are, however, some downsides to the relative treble emphasis of the HD 800. I frequently use Santana's Black Magic Woman to test the sound of new equipment, especially the great percussion sounds. I previously noticed that the voice track on this song was either modified electronically or had two recordings combined, I am not sure just what. Through the HD 800, there was annoying sibilance on it; through the UE 10s, there was borderline sibilance which was not annoying. The UE 11s were similar to the UE 10s, no problem there either.

I see this as largely corroborating what Skylab found. I have a high end source, and a number of headfiers have reported that my amp is a good fit with the HD 800, and so I think that what I heard represents good overall synergy with the HD 800. Anyone considering the HD 800 should be aware that its presentation of bass and treble might not be to his or her liking. That said, I differ from Skylab in that I think the HD 800 is fully worth its $1,400 price, and it is now what I reach for first. But I will still grab the UEs when I want greater bass presence; nothing I am ashamed of there.
 
Jul 5, 2009 at 4:22 AM Post #343 of 632
Quote:

Originally Posted by Canman /img/forum/go_quote.gif
My plan is to use the m902 with the HD800 so I'm a little disappointed to read that comment. I really like the m902 with the HD600 so I will probably end up trying it anyway.


Canman, I really like the m902 with the GS1K (via optical and computer as source), and the HD650 isn't far behind. But for whatever reason, I can't get the HD800 to synergize with the Grace. I haven't spent much time testing this combo so take my impression with a grain of salt. The next time I do, I'll definitely set the volume even lower to see if that makes a difference. I'm anxious to hear your impressions and looking forward to your take, preliminary or otherwise.
 
Jul 5, 2009 at 5:41 AM Post #344 of 632
Quote:

Originally Posted by raccoon /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I'm pleased with the performance from my Yamaha receiver's headphone jack
biggrin.gif
It'll have to do till I can afford a balanced setup, but right now I don't see a need to upgrade.



I have the Yamaha 1800.. It drives the HD800 well?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top