[WhiskeyJacks]

Compared the HD600 with Hifiman 400S what is the more analytical with low bitrate tracks ????

When you say Analytical at low bit rate do you mean accurate and or detailed?, or show bad recording? I know I personally would prefer the he 400s because of its potential of sounding good from mobile sources without an amp of higher power. I also know both sound great but I believe that he 400s may do better with lower bit rate because made to be able to used with ones phone in mind

 

[ProtegeManiac]

 

Compared the HD600 with Hifiman 400S what is the more analytical with low bitrate tracks ????

 

It doesn't matter what the bitrate is, whichever has the flattest response will be more analytical. The problem with how most people understand that term is that when the sound is "'boring' and bright" it's called analytical, which it isn't. Some AKGs get called "analytical" for "bringing out details (in the treble)," but if you looked at the graph, it has an elevated response somewhere between 5khz and 10khz, either a sharp spike or a relatively wide mesa (like the K701). Some even consider that the "true sound," makes bad recordings "shine through." 

 

The truth is that "analytical" is a fabricated and misleading term. Such headphones/speakers do not simply let bad recordings "shine through" in terms of transparency, that treble response makes bad recordings worse. 

At the same time, very low bitrate compression, and more so if you do it on a badly recorded track, will end up sounding very thin regardless of what headphone you use it with, except the response on some headphones can make it seem less severe. 

 

 

Note that this must not be taken to mean I don't like those same AKGs right out, because remember no transducer has a perfectly flat response. However if no EQ is involved a safer (though not necessarily always preferable) choice is to have a response in that treble region that would be slightly weaker than the midrange and with no spikes, like the HD650. Somewhere between the K7-- and HD650 is the HD600. If you are willing to use EQ, introducing a cut at that range is personally easier to implement than boosting the HD650 in the same region, since boosting at any area can introduce distortion unlike when you reduce the response.

 

At the same time, very low bitrate compression, and more so if you do it on a badly recorded track, will end up sounding very thin regardless of what headphone you use it with, except the response on some headphones can make it seem less severe. 

 

---

 

Now, between the HD600 and HE400i, the treble response of the HE400i isn't that much stronger than at 1khz compared to AKG, but from what I remember of its graph, the HD600's response from 1khz to 10khz is relatively smoother. Then there's how they're worn - I relaxed the headband frame on my HD600, so barring a more detailed treble (but not ear-wrenching treble) like with how the cymbal crashes sound (gradual decay that is very audible if it reverberates for long enough before the next hit, as opposed to grating and masking that vibration), they're just about even. Wear the HD600 tighter, and for a while it will be warmer; wear out the pads, and the treble will be sharper. Add to that the kind of distortion your amp gets if you play either loud enough, and in some cases it may exacerbate the treble on either.

 

At the other end of the range, the boosted upper bass and lower mids on the HD600 can make some drum hits sound thicker along with some of the guitars and bass guitar, but since it trails off sharply below 50hz, that can make bass drums sound like you just stuffed a snare with a pillow, whereas the HE400i is flatter and while some other percussion hits might not have as much "bite" to them, the tone of the bass drum, bass guitar, and double bass will be closer to what they are on the file and the headphone won't make them sound worse than what compression already did. Still, if it was badly recorded to begin with, then it won't matter either way, especially when compression is included.

 

So basically, if anything, what I'm getting at is get a good amp so either way you can't make it worse than what the file and the headphone's response can do, and get proper copies of those files down the line. If you don't plan on getting lower impedance headphones aside from choosing between the HE400i and the HD600, then get the Sennheiser and use an OTL amp like the Little Dot MkII, or a hybrid with slightly warmer overall tone like the Pangea HP101.

 

 

 

 

[paulguru]

When you say Analytical at low bit rate do you mean accurate and or detailed?, or show bad recording? I know I personally would prefer the he 400s because of its potential of sounding good from mobile sources without an amp of higher power. I also know both sound great but I believe that he 400s may do better with lower bit rate because made to be able to used with ones phone in mind

ABSOLUTTLY this one

 

[ryanedmunds]

Hey Guys, I should be receiving a Chord Mojo next week.
Would the Mojo be powerful enough to drive the HD 600's?
 
Thinking of buying some to test the Mojo out. Currently have a pair of Oppo PM-3s which will be fine.

 

[crafft]

  Hey Guys, I should be receiving a Chord Mojo next week.
Would the Mojo be powerful enough to drive the HD 600's?
 
Thinking of buying some to test the Mojo out. Currently have a pair of Oppo PM-3s which will be fine.

Mojo can drive the HD600 loud enough but there are better pairings. HD600 never sounds "full" with Mojo. AQ Dragonfly 1.2 does a better job driving the HD600 imo.
 
I think your PM3 and Mojo will be great!

 

[audiojun]

Anyone have or heard the hd 600 from both the bottlehead crack and the o2 amp? What are your impressions, i was thinking about getting the O2 to be more portable.

 

[reihead]

 
Very interested in the comparison!!

 
 

+1

 
 

 

 
Yes, I can say now that the mojo drives the HD600 very very well, also I agree with the opinion that there are better parings than the mojo.
But! amazing what the mojo can do, also, depending on the preference, the mojo seems to add more definition comparing to the bottlehead crackhead for example.
 
I still prefer the crackhead with my HD600, mostly because the lust sound, but I would recommend the mojo as a "cheap" (plus mobile) option for a DAC/AMP for the HD600.

 

[singleended58]

HD600 is matched pretty well with Liquid Carbon balanced amp.

 

[smy1]

For anyone who did the foam mod. What's your opinion on it because I just did it. I feel like the music is much more lively/realistic less bass wider soundstage and much more cleaner. Also do the earpads that cover up the driver if you leave it out does it make any sound quality difference?

I am actually shocked because how much the sound quality changed now

 

[BrettMatthews]

Anyone have or heard the hd 600 from both the bottlehead crack and the o2 amp? What are your impressions, i was thinking about getting the O2 to be more portable.

I have both and am pretty pleased with both. I certainly prefer the crack over the O2, but the O2 still does a good job with the HD600.

 

[DeadHead57]

Another real nice amp for the HD600 is the Schiit Valhalla 2. I am thoroughly enjoying this combo!

 

[howdy]

How about pairing this with the iFi Micro DSD?

 

[Brooko]

Great combo !

 

[PinkyPowers]

I've mostly been listening to the LCD-2s, but tonight I wanted to hear how the HD600 has changed on my new NFB-28.

These things scale so well.

 

[paulguru]

Anyone try it with Bravo V2 ?
Some feedback ?