Upgrading your ears and mind is the best upgrade you can make. Go to the store and buy ear cleaning liquid. Also drink some wine or tea or smoke some weed for the best effect.
you can get your ears treated by an ear specialist and would still be cheaper and more effective than cables.
I got HD650 cable and I find myself preferring original cable to HD650 cable. The latter is just warmer and darker to me. It is quite cheap though, got around 20USD from Senn Asia. So, It won't hurt to try out anyway. No experience with cardas cable.
Nothing strange why it sounds different, since those two cables have different impedance, the end result depends on your amplifier. Which load it prefers the most. In most situations, the original cable should be the best, that's why it IS the original cable. But, with some amps it can sound subjectively better with a different cable. As can a different tonecurve on an eq... Anyway, what matters most is if you like the sound
edit. I can reveal a dark secret, sometimes when I go to sleep I use a 6 meter long very cheap extension cable for my HD-600:s, so I can route the signal from my main rig to my bed(through a wall), as far as I can tell it sounds exactly as good as when straight from the jack ...
Upgrading your ears and mind is the best upgrade you can make. Go to the store and buy ear cleaning liquid. Also drink some wine or tea or smoke some weed for the best effect.
you can get your ears treated by an ear specialist and would still be cheaper and more effective than cables.
Took the plung on this.
http://www.accessoryjack.com/sennheiser-hd600-open-dynamic-hifi-professional-headphones.html
$310 seems like a good price and I feel like its an important headphone to experience on my journey, but everything I've read makes me think I'm not going to be very impressed. I'm more of a treble and detail whore who likes fast, airy, exciting, and sparkly cans. The HD 600 seems to be the opposite of that. I'll be prepared for the worst while hoping for the best. I think I'm open minded too, so I wouldn't be surprised if the HD 600 could refine and revise my tastes in a positive direction. Will throw out some initial thoughts after a couple hundred hours of testing.
Took the plunge...but everything I've read makes me think I'm not going to be very impressed. I'm more of a treble and detail whore who likes fast, airy, exciting, and sparkly cans. The HD 600 seems to be the opposite of that.
With the right amp and source it will be - took me a while before I got to listen to (then find, and buy) the Meier Cantate. CMOY and to a lesser extent the PB-1 Toucan, both with an iMod, were a bit too warm on the midrange down to the bass. I'm only appreciating the D-Zero I normally use with my active monitors because my Cantate blew its transformer (and international shipping from DigiKey). Other amps/sources I've liked with it are the Asgard, HRT iStreamer, and Burson Soloist (adds a bit of warmth but lots of grunt to it).
And source files. The HD600 is truly revealing, and not because of a treble tilt. Now I'm not saying to re-rip your entire library to FLAC (I actually don't think there's any audible difference between 24/172 and 320 mp3), but 128kbps files will sound terribly compressed and make for a bad listening experience. 256 kbps and up should be fine.
And source files. The HD600 is truly revealing, and not because of a treble tilt. Now I'm not saying to re-rip your entire library to FLAC (I actually don't think there's any audible difference between 24/172 and 320 mp3), but 128kbps files will sound terribly compressed and make for a bad listening experience. 256 kbps and up should be fine.
Whoa, check you source and amp.....I can definately tell the difference in my HD tracks at 24/96 compared to flac content at 16/44. I have a couple dozen studio master flac albums downloaded at 24/96, and the same ripped from 16/44 CD's.
Whoa, check you source and amp.....I can definately tell the difference in my HD tracks at 24/96 compared to flac content at 16/44. I have a couple dozen studio master flac albums downloaded at 24/96, and the same ripped from 16/44 CD's.
The 24/96 files simply allow mastering headroom and extra dynamic range. Any recording that makes use of that kind of range would blow your eardums out. Mastering is the true key.
I've downloaded several albums from HDTracks, and converted them to 320 using dbpoweramp (LAME engine) and A/B'ed. No difference whatsoever.
Whoa, check you source and amp.....I can definately tell the difference in my HD tracks at 24/96 compared to flac content at 16/44. I have a couple dozen studio master flac albums downloaded at 24/96, and the same ripped from 16/44 CD's.
The 24/96 files simply allow mastering headroom and extra dynamic range. Any recording that makes use of that kind of range would blow your eardums out. Mastering is the true key.
I've downloaded several albums from HDTracks, and converted them to 320 using dbpoweramp (LAME engine) and A/B'ed. No difference whatsoever.
Blow my eardrums out? Don't understand that comment! The high definition studio master albums that I have downloaded are mostly from Linn Records and other sources, some from HDTracks, typically they require a 10db increase in volume, to volume match with my other flac files of the same material. Mastering doesn't get much better than studio masters. I use EAC to rip CD's to flac, so I don't think 320 lossy files can be better. You must be using portable gears if yo don't hear a difference. My gears are listed in my sig, and A/B using the studio master vs ripped flac, with the same albums, to my ears don't compare. If I sample a good album from Linn Records, and like the sound, I prefer to download the studio master flac for the best quality. You hear the hi res files way different than these ears! If I had a choice and the means to get the studio masters in hi res, for the few dollars more, that would be all that I purchase, they are that good! I won't argue with your 320 mp3's if they make you happy. But, many artists absolutly hate MP3 copies of their work.....I am speaking of someone like Neil Young who rarely even put their best music on CD. I have many of his albums that are 24/96 DVDAudio, great quality. Many here don't have the gears to play back 24/96 files, with cheap drive space, no reason not to have hires!
eke, last time I checked I couldn't find any recording studios that record in 320kbps MP3 format. If they are that good there should be some. Evidently you have never heard of Blu Ray, 24/192 music.....I suppose to you. DVD is just as good too, or do you get your movies in 320kbps?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
![size]](http://files.head-fi.org/images/smilies/biggrin.gif[size=13px][/size])
