Senn HD-650/Zu vs. Sony SA5000

[gevorg]

What are the main differences between these two sets?

 

[some1x]

Straight out of DAC1's internal amplifier, I prefer HD650 with stock cable over SA5000 for all genres of music. SA5000 is thin and light on bass; the HD650 sounds very natural to me.

Things could change once I get my Dynahi, which should arrive before summer ends.

 

[Iron_Dreamer]

I think the SA5000 is no doubt BETTER than the HD650, in that it has more detail. It is different in that it offers a more neutral accurate sound than the HD650/Zu, which I prefer, so it was better for me on both counts, and the HD650's have found a new home.

Pick the HD650 well IMO, only if you want a darker, bassier, slower, more colored sound. Pick the SA5K if you want a more detailed, neutral, and dynamic sound. I prefer the SA5K on all genres, but others (due to taste) might not (i.e. they find it too revealing/neutral, etc.)

I think the DAC1 headphone amp is very good, I could not A-B the difference to the Grave m902 headphone amp ($1700!!!), so I think unless you want a balanced or tube amp (or perhaps crazy high current like Dynahi) you have no need to worr about the DAC1's headphone amp.

 

[Andrea]

Iron Dreamer, have you seen GerG's response measurements (and all further comments) of the SA5000, versus the HD650 ? Do you feel so confident in calling it 'neutral' and 'accurate' ?

Btw, the HD650 is nowhere close to sounding like "thick" to my ears... perhaps you really favour the SA5000's thinness -- which from your comments I'm growing convinced it sounds (thin)...

 

[Iron_Dreamer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrea Iron Dreamer, have you seen GerG's response measurements (and all further comments) of the SA5000, versus the HD650 ? Do you feel so confident in calling it 'neutral' and 'accurate' ? Btw, the HD650 is nowhere close to sounding like "thick" to my ears... perhaps you really favour the SA5000's thinness -- which from your comments I'm growing convinced it sounds (thin)...

Considering what an (admittedly, even by gerG) inexact science mesuring headphone response is, I trust my ears more than a graph made by someone I have never met before. To me, the Sony simply sounded better in every regard. Objectively it beats the 650 in detail. Subjectively I find it has a more pleasing sound signature (to me). Though you may disagree that the flavor is to my liking and not yours, I would find it very tough for someone who has critically listened to both to argue that the Sennheiser is the superior technical performer (i.e. detail).

 

[spike33]

I hope gerg post some new measurements once his sa5000 is burned in.

 

[Iron_Dreamer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by spike33 I hope gerg post some new measurements once his sa5000 is burned in.

Better yet, perhaps headroom will post some, at least they have a more proper setup to measure these things accurately. Of course will all the issues delved into in the SA5K FR thread, who knows what the ideal graph would look like anyway?

 

[Andrea]

No, I don't mean to argue that the SA5000 is not superior for 'detail', but -- the consistence-coherence of freq. response is indeed a crucial part of the 'technical ability' of a headphone... so honestly, even from a technical standpoint (which, by the way, can't even be separated from a 'musical' standpoint IMO, if not by a pure mental abstraction), I wouldn't know myself how to weigh things in order to label the one 'superior', or rather 'better'. Although I do have my views.

 

[Soundbuff]

After adding an Equinox to my 650 and treating all system contacts with ProGold, I am AMAZED at the level of detail it can provide. I've never heard an SA5000 to compare but the 650 has all the detail I'd ever want. Sometimes I can even hear too much...like the sound of musician's breathing, moving in chairs, clothes moving, etc. ProGold is amazing stuff.

 

[TonyTripleA]

Iron Dreamer: I'm of the same mind as you. I call the Sony's neutral. More than that they seem to lift a fog to get to the absolute clarity of the instruments and voice.

I think they suit the DAC1 headphone amp very well, and my beloved Talisman which outperforms several other amps I have tried doesn't improve the sound to a significantly detectable level for me.

Sony's light on bass? A big surprise to me. I find the bass is recording dependant but play some Santana and see if you don't feel there is too much bass! Low bass is surprisingly good.

No doubt the HD650 are good. But I have no regrets with the Sony's.

TonyAAA

 

[JaZZ]

Although my SA5000 has just 50 hours on it (most of them brutal break-in signals), I feel quite confident to say that it won't change substantially anymore, as it hasn't shown significant changes anymore after the first six hours. As it is now, it sounds all but neutral to my ears, but shrill, strident, squawky and reverberative. The latter feature is easily explainable by the reflective surfaces on the inside of the earpieces...

Coating at least the rear edge resulting from the angled baffle makes a considerable difference, but also unmasks a certain unrefinedness the reverberative sleekness has smoothed over. Detail is there, but I don't think it's necessarily higher than with the HD 650, just more exposed. My impression fairly aligns with gerG's FR graph: the 2.4-kHz hump is painfully audible with most recordings, and the transitions between bass and mids as well as mids and highs aren't as seamless as I'd wish them to be. After all I like the bass, which is substantial, well textured and extended. But I haven't found one recording with which I didn't clearly prefer the HD 650 for its more refined and neutral presentation. 50% of my pop/rock and jazz CDs as well as 95% of my classical CDs are downright unlistenable through the SA5000. This with Corda HA-2 MkII; surprisingly with the EMP it's even worse. And switching the source from the UDP-1 to the DAC2 didn't make it better either. I would be heavily surprised if the SA5000 would surprise me with substantial changes (especially with sonic balance) to the good the next few days.

 

[JaZZ]

To be fair: The negative attitude in my above post reflects my disappointment about having wasted $500 and may not do entirely justice to the SA5000. What can't be denied though is that it doesn't meet my sonic expectations.

 

[spike33]

Jazz, I felt same way as you but after 80 hrs or so, it got alot better. Right now, I'd say its on the bright side of neutral but nowhere near what gerg's graph suggests.

 

[ssportclay]

I like the SA5000 but it is a bit of a mixed bag.I think it will be too bright for most people through a Meier-Audio amplifier and it does have a sony Reverb quality to it.Bass and detail are both excellent for a headphone.Soundstage and depth perception are the best I have heard.Dynamics are also great,(this headphone is a groovalizer).

 

[acs236]

Regarding brightness, I sent my SA5000s along to another meet that I couldn't attend at sacdlover's house. Sacdlover, also a 650-lover tried and true, is the person most sensitive to brightness that I ever met. We've been to a few meets in the past, and I joke with him about it. As an example, he can't stand to wear the CD3000s for more than a few seconds. It's pretty amusing. Anyway, my point is, he tried the SA5000, and while he certainly didn't rave about them (see the Ohio Meet #3 thread), he didn't think they were bright. That means something to me.