[god-bluff]

Can't they just bring the HD250 back? That's what a closed Sennheiser should be IMO.

 

[cdsa35000]

Maybe I missed this on the thread, but does anyone know how the VB system works?

Presumably it's some form of passive electrical EQ (can't be physical / acoustic as on COP, as it is only on one side, and as there doesn't appear to be a power source, it can't be active).

Passive bassbooster is simple a stereo potmeter and passive bass filter network:
https://www.tablix.org/~avian/blog/archives/2009/04/dynamic_bass_boost/



http://makearadio.com/tech/tone.htm

 

[Sundown]

People who said this looks ugly, how old are you? This is obviously targeted to millenials and Gen Z, so I'm quite curious if older people find this ugly. I personally find it pretty cool looking (I'm 24 this year).

Right side cable entry also makes sense since I usually put my phone/DAP in my right pocket, so this would reduce cable tangling. The cable not being removable kinda sucks though.

I'm about worried about the recessed mids but I think V-shape sound signature is quite popular among millenials, judging on how popular the ATH M50x is for this demographic. Won't speculate more on SQ since I haven't listened to it.

Although I do agree that Senn shouldn't have named this HD 630, I think people here have too much premature negativity. Wait for more reviews or try it yourself first. Overall I find this headphone quite interesting and I'd definitely audition them once it comes out.

im 26 and what these are, are freaking hideous.

 

[CJG888]

I'm afraid they went for bling rather than Bauhaus.

 

[Raketen]

 

 

[shawtuw]

If you look at a pair of HD650s, form clearly follows function, although an aluminium frame would be nicer than a plastic one...

 
See, this comment right here is at least one of the reasons why I think they've made this headphone. So many people complain about the polymer frame on the HD-6x0. I think it is a good design. Why add weight to an indoor headphone? They are more than strong enough for normal use and the advantage of the design they chose is that they are extremely lightweight. Going over to metal doesn't always yield the increased durability that people believe it does. Aluminum is not like steel in terms of its ability to undergo elastic deformation repeatedly, and I guarantee you they're not going to be using much steel in a headphone if they want it to stay lightweight. Polymers tend to be capable of more elastic cycles than aluminum (Nearly infinite if the material doesn't degrade from other factors). I haven't looked up the exact polymer Sennheiser uses, but I'm sure we could find out. I'd be interested to know actually. The specifications for the polymer will be readily available, as these kinds of things are listed by the manufacturer specifically so that engineers can integrate the proper material into their products.
 
My only point here is that just because something is "plastic," that doesn't mean it wasn't properly engineered or that it is inferior to a metal product. Metals can be made to look more premium than most polymers though (Although carbon fiber composites can look pretty good) and there are certainly applications where metals make sense. So, I do agree there. I've just been dealing with this stuff in the firearms industry for a long time. There are people who still can't grasp the fact that polymer frames are not weak and some of them even discuss how the frame will melt, not understanding that not all polymers are thermoplastic. The rubber in your tires is not a thermoplastic, for example, since it cannot be melted due to sulfur cross-linking (aka - vulcanization). A lot of polymers are also composite materials, such as FRN (Fiberglass reinforced nylon), which has been used for many applications including handles for knives. It is a surprisingly tough, resilient material. The properties you can obtain through the use of composite materials is absolutely stunning. Just look at carbon fiber composites, which have insane properties which can be adjusted based upon the weave of the fibers within the composite matrix. With modern 3D weaving the possibilities are virtually endless. Unfortunately, people don't look this stuff up and they just blindly assume that metal is always better than plastic. I'm not saying you're one of those people, but I do believe this comment (Which comes up constantly) could be one of the reasons this very product exists.

 

[Antihippy]

The HD25 is an all-plastic headphone and it is one of the most well-built and durable headphone I have ever owned.

 

[DiscoProJoe]

I wonder how these will compare to my beloved V-Moda M-100s? 

 
I did the math on the sensitivity of these HD630VBs (114dB / 1V  @ 23 ohms), and found it to be about 98dB / 1mW.
 
The M-100s have a sensitivity of 103dB / 1mW, and are 32 ohms.

 

[DiscoProJoe]

  If it sounds anything remotely like the SZ2000 throw it in the can.

 
I hung out on the SZ2000 thread a week ago for awhile to see what it was about, and it definitely doesn't seem like it would be my type of preferred bass, either. High-pitched, "boomy" bass that bleeds into the midrange and drowns it out? Midrange lacking detail?
 
Not for me, either. I like how one guy on this HD630VB thread called it a "fart cannon"!  

  Ha Ha

 

[spurxiii]

I hung out on the SZ2000 thread a week ago for awhile to see what it was about, and it definitely doesn't seem like it would be my type of preferred bass, either. High-pitched, "boomy" bass that bleeds into the midrange and drowns it out? Midrange lacking detail?

Not for me, either. I like how one guy on this HD630VB thread called it a "fart cannon"!   :bigsmile_face:   Ha Ha

The bass was overpowering and the craziest. It does pretty much drown out the other frequencies. You know those cars that drive by and the only think you hear is this earth shattering sound that shakes your own car lol. I wouldn't call the bass boomy and the mid bass doesn't overpower that much but the mids and highs to me were very very veiled like the singers were underwater. The SZ2000 only sounds decent with one type of music, bassy hip hop. The kind they play at car shows.

 

[Carlsan]

I'm afraid they went for bling rather than Bauhaus.

 

[bias]

I don't understand why eq isn't used to accomplish the same ends.  I, as a recording engineer use eq everyday to create tonality that's appealing to me or works to benefit the mix.  What's wrong with end user using good eq software to do the same thing?  I really don't understand the reluctance or apprehension.  A broad q, judiciously applied, won't have perceivable artifacts, yet will let the end user tailor their headphone freq output to their liking  End users spending hours/days/weeks? modding headphones and manufacturers including selectable freq response curves built into the headphones implies, to me, that many end users don't realize how much eq is introduced in the recording process itself.  It's all over the place.  Even in the tracking stage.  I think anyone spending over $500 for a pair of cans ought to book an hour or two at a local recording or better yet mastering studio, bring some fave CD's and listen and discuss with the engineers there.  I'm inclined to think it would be an eye opener and a great learning experience for the end user who, apparently, is truly passionate about high fidelity recordings.

 

[Raketen]

Pretty big difference between studio equalizers on multi-tracks and applying an end-user EQ to something that is already EQ'd/processed/compressed isn't there? These are designed for phones, but I guess there are plenty of good EQ apps for i0s/android now.
 
Personally tend to leave things unaltered- especially since I listen to shuffle so much- the next track would be playing by the time I found my ideal settings 

Not everything responds the same either. In that case, for people with certain tastes, I think there's justification for adjustable passive filtration or other novelty tech.
'
Sometimes the tech itself is the appeal. Like those new AKG mentioned in this thread, with microphones in the cup to measure and automatically EQ to user preferences... kinda insane, but also cool- pretty much just automating the process you describe.

 

[bias]

Well, no the eq's used in mastering studios are typically applied to the stereo mix, the same as where an end user would use an eq.
 
On these boards I read a lot of people trying to attain a certain "accuracy" or "purity" from their listening system; a kind of guarantee that their amp, DAC, transducer isn't adding or subtracting from what we provide from the studios.
 
If that's the case, probably the best bet is to slowly sweep sine wave tones through your headphones, listening carefully to where you hear deviations in amplitude and then just apply eq at those freqs to flatten the tone.  Engineers have been doing that forever to eq their own monitor busses to get a flatter FR.  They also have been putting tissue paper in front of tweeters so it all depends!  For us, as long as we know how a specific speaker sounds in a specific room, the FR doesn't need to be "flat".  Their's a lot of other considerations.
 
Of course it's not exactly this simple, but a good software eq like something from Izotope, used intelligently and wisely, would at least be much easier adjust the FR of a pair of cans than physical manipulations which cannot be A-B'd quickly enough to detect the subtle changes in FR that most decent cans would need to make them more either euphonic or accurate or what have you.

 

[ginetto61]

Hi i see
 
Sennheiser HD 630VB  $549.00 
 
   i wonder if this is the admission price for good sound 

And yes ... at this price level detachable cables would be nice.

Regards, gino