[equalspeace]

I thought the review on DIY-Audio-Heaven was excellent, as all his reviews are IMO. I thought that the following two statements were the most telling for me;-

'The main complaints for the HD660S were lack of bass extension and lacking in clarity and being a bit ‘conservative’ on the treble level.
The HD660S seemed to address the main ‘complaints’ about the HD600 and HD650 (upper midrange emphasis) yet is often disliked for that change.
The HD660S2 is touted as an improved HD660S doubling the SPL at 20Hz and increasing the clarity above 5kHz.

The HD600 is found to be lacking in bass extension and too ‘clear’. The HD650 was fuller sounding (more midbass presence) and some found it too ‘midrange’ oriented.The HD660S (to me) was a nice compromise. A bit fuller sounding than HD600 and a bit ‘tighter’ in the lows than HD650. The HD660S did not have the ‘brightness’ of the HD600 but was a bit more ‘laid-back’. As if one is listening to the music a bit further away.'

'There is no need to replace your HD660S with the HD660S2 though. They are more similar than different with just slightly more treble in the HD660S2. The extra few dB bass extension isn’t as audible as the advertising claims.'


So, he states that, as I also thought, that the 660S was a slight improvement on the 650 (he says so more explicitly in the original 660S review - The sound quality, to me, is a small notch above that of the HD650). He also states that, as they are so close, it's not necessary to replace the S1 with the S2. He does not say however that the S2 is not better than the S1. I thought it was a very well balanced review.

I really disagree with the point about not needing to replace the S1 with S2. For my money the S2 stomped all over the S1. But then S1 never really beat 650/600 either. S2 is comfortably on par with 650/600 or maybe slightly better overall when you consider all of the improvements they made with that headphone. But that S1 versus S2 comment is just way off to me. Main reason is S2 digs out micro detail like 650/600, with S2 technical performance. What this did for me was lead to a greater perceived resolution over 650/600, because the improved technical aspects combined with that very good 650/600 level detail retrieval, which S1 lacked.

I still think about S2. It's a damned good performer. I am wondering if the strengths I like about 650/600 are worth still prioritizing them over S2 because of the improvements made with S2 given above.

 

[kman1211]

I have owned seven Sennheiser headphones. Never hated any. Never disliked any. However, I never loved any of them either.
I kept hearing and reading that I just didn't get it. The HD600's and HD650's (HD6XX's for me) were the absolute standards in the head-fi hobby and I just wasn't getting it.
I did like the HD660's, but all the Senn's felt a little bass light for me. I never felt like any Senn headphone could be my only headphone if need be. I do feel that way about the Clear's and the Grado GH2's.

But maybe the S2's could fill a niche in my collection, like the iBasso SR2's.

I am a hopeless romantic when it comes to headphones.

I understand that’s been my feeling for the longest time with Sennheisers and I’m only recently starting to appreciate and enjoy them more. But they’re still not headphones that can be my one and only headphones, only Beyer has managed to accomplish that for me so far. They’re more of a niche or compliment headphone for me, I like having at least one around for when I’m in the mood.

 

[Mike F]

I really disagree with the point about not needing to replace the S1 with S2. For my money the S2 stomped all over the S1. But then S1 never really beat 650/600 either. S2 is comfortably on par with 650/600 or maybe slightly better overall when you consider all of the improvements they made with that headphone. But that S1 versus S2 comment is just way off to me. Main reason is S2 digs out micro detail like 650/600, with S2 technical performance. What this did for me was lead to a greater perceived resolution over 650/600, because the improved technical aspects combined with that very good 650/600 level detail retrieval, which S1 lacked.

I respect your opinion of course, but given the above it seems very curious that you sent the S2 back!

I still think about S2. It's a damned good performer. I am wondering if the strengths I like about 650/600 are worth still prioritizing them over S2 because of the improvements made with S2 given the above.

You seem to be wondering why yourself!

 

[equalspeace]

I respect your opinion of course, but given the above it seems very curious that you sent the S2 back!



You seem to be wondering why yourself!

Well as I said I was getting headaches after using them for some reason. I may eventually try another pair

 

[Mike F]

I did wait for that review to appear because Solderdude has always been very precise and accurate. He always observes and comments very important things that others choose to neglect. Also he gives some of the best and more meaningful sets of measurements. He is usually second to none.
However, given the frequency response similarities to the other 6## series headphones I expected to read at least more analysis on resolution and timbre matters to form a better idea of any significant improvements. This is absent and also contradicting many users' comments here who observe real improvement. Eventually I'll have to listen myself at some point. Or will wait for your review, Mike!
A few months ago I asked Solderdude to fully review the NDH 30, but he replied that it isn't going to happen unless someone sends him a set. Also he seemed not to expect that much of this headphone, having the HD-560 driver (!) Strange enough and I hope he has changed his mind by now. It is not a headphone that he can afford not to review (or enjoy).

This may be better on the 'other' thread, but for the sake of responding to the above, and for the benefit of those here interested in the NDH 30, I'll post this here. (Those averse to any mention of 'the headphone which should not be mentioned in this thread', please skip to the final paragraph!)

Here's what Solderdude (DIY-Audio-Heaven) posted on ASR. I won't post a direct link because I think it's against forum rules, but this is post #81 on the 'New Neumann NDH 30 coming' thread;-

'The damping scheme of the driver differs for sure, the part around the driver and pads as well.
So the HD560S and NDH30 are completely different headphones in every sense of the word.
The driver may have the same magnet and even have the same membrane and driver but that's the only thing that these headphones may have in common.
The HD560S thus (certainly acc to measurements) is not a 'low budget' NDH30 at all.'

Interestingly, in post #87 he also said this:-

'Neumann is big in the studio world and that's where the closed NDH-20 and open NDH-30 are intended for.
See it as a headphone 'addition' to their studio monitor line.
It is not an attempt to conquer the consumer headphone world.'

And back to the S2, perhaps the reason that he doesn't give more analysis on resolution and timbre matters is because, like the other YT reviewers linked earlier in this thread, he just doesn't hear that much difference to the other sixes. Not at least the kind of difference that would set the S2 apart from the family sound of the others to make it worth mentioning as such.

 

[Harold999]

A few months ago I asked Solderdude to fully review the NDH 30, but he replied that it isn't going to happen unless someone sends him a set. Also he seemed not to expect that much of this headphone, having the HD-560 driver (!)

I just read somewhere that the NDH 30 driver is the HD558/598 driver, not the 560S.

https://www.ecoustics.com/reviews/neumann-ndh-30/

Internally, the Neumann NDH 30 uses a 38mm driver with a nominal impedance of 120 ohms and a sensitivity of 104dB (1 kHz/1Vrms).

A friend of mine who has been modifying his NDH 30 headphones (Vitaly Belz) was kind enough to provide me with some internal photos.

The drivers come from Sennheiser, and are marked #528480 which is the same part used in the HD558 and HD598 headphones

 

[tamleo]

I just read somewhere that the NDH 30 driver is the HD558/598 driver, not the 560S.

https://www.ecoustics.com/reviews/neumann-ndh-30/

Internally, the Neumann NDH 30 uses a 38mm driver with a nominal impedance of 120 ohms and a sensitivity of 104dB (1 kHz/1Vrms).

A friend of mine who has been modifying his NDH 30 headphones (Vitaly Belz) was kind enough to provide me with some internal photos.

The drivers come from Sennheiser, and are marked #528480 which is the same part used in the HD558 and HD598 headphones

I am impressed with “the hp that shouldn’t be mentioned”’s specs. The thd is even better than that on the 660s2 let alone the 5-series from Sennheiser

 

[tamleo]

Does anyone know what is the 660s apogee? Its SPL specs seems to be different from the normal 660s. Maybe it is why a gentleman here said the first batch of the 600s sounded worse than the recent one.

 

[headstef]

I just read somewhere that the NDH 30 driver is the HD558/598 driver, not the 560S.

https://www.ecoustics.com/reviews/neumann-ndh-30/

Internally, the Neumann NDH 30 uses a 38mm driver with a nominal impedance of 120 ohms and a sensitivity of 104dB (1 kHz/1Vrms).

A friend of mine who has been modifying his NDH 30 headphones (Vitaly Belz) was kind enough to provide me with some internal photos.

The drivers come from Sennheiser, and are marked #528480 which is the same part used in the HD558 and HD598 headphones

Sennheiser has stated earlier that the numbers on the various parts of drivers signify the parts not the whole drivers. So it seems that was the part of the little board for soldering wires. (Also the drivers have been extensively discussed by Sennheiser in the NDH 30 this thread; they say that in the 30s it is the 560 driver but with extremely strict selection, up to the limit of what is possible; elsewhere they say only the (high-tech) diaphragm is the same but the tuning is different and thus it is essentially a different driver.)

 

[Rob80b]

I just read somewhere that the NDH 30 driver is the HD558/598 driver, not the 560S.

Pretty sure the Drop HD58X has the same driver (but don't quote me on it) and for the price point gives the HD660S a run for its money...long tern listening and direct comparisons gave the edge to the 660S, still the 58X had more apparent bass so probably also holds up well to the 6S. It is image definition, harmonics and distortion at higher volumes where the 660S won out and the S2 IMHO does it even better, not to mention improved layering, depth, apparent width probably from the improved treble and the boost in bass.

 

[rafaelo]

Pretty sure the Drop HD58X has the same driver (but don't quote me on it) and for the price point gives the HD660S a run for its money...long tern listening and direct comparisons gave the edge to the 660S, still the 58X had more apparent bass so probably also holds up well to the 6S. It is image definition, harmonics and distortion at higher volumes where the 660S won out and the S2 IMHO does it even better, not to mention improved layering, depth, apparent width probably from the improved treble and the boost in bass.

I do not believe that the 58X has the same driver with 5 series at all. Also this 5 series driver is angled.

 

[Rob80b]

I do not believe that the 58X has the same driver with 5 series at all. Also this 5 series driver is angled.

Definitely a 5 series driver, just not absolutely sure it's the 528480 and it's the cups/baffle that are holding the driver at an angle.

 

[Rob80b]

Sennheiser has stated earlier that the numbers on the various parts of drivers signify the parts not the whole drivers...........

Sennheiser/Neumann managed to get the best out of the 560S driver diaphragm....end of story. : )

This should be a sticky.

The NDH 30 uses the diaphragm of the HD 560S. It's a polymer blend with extraordinary internal dampening, so afterringing after the initial impulse is minimal. At the audiophile team of Sennheiser/Sonova, we have done a multitude of listening tests (also for the HD 660S2) and found that it compromises brilliance and detail retrieval. This is partly because the internal damping is so strong that the initial impulse at high frequencies may not be replicated accurately (it's slightly "blunted").

Re: S2

Instead, we use the laminate material of the HD 800 S, which has slightly higher THD in the bass and more natural decay. Most importantly it accurately reproduces impulses compared to the polymer blend material. Interestingly you can't see that in a frequency response. Even if you equalize the different materials in the same shell for the same treble amplitude, the laminate will subjectively sound as if it had more treble due to the more natural initial impulse response and also possibly due to increased decay.

Ultimately, it's a decision between minimal decay and cleaner bass or faithful treble impulse response, and it's okay to have a preference one way or the other. We as a team unanimously decided on superior detail retrieval as the raison d'etre for all of our audiophile headphones except the entry-level, and I believe the HD 660S2 is a great representative of that philosophy.

660S vs S2 ...........

The acoustic difference between HD 660S and HD 660S2 have mostly been achieved by significant changes to the transducer, which has a markedly different diaphragm, voice coil and magnet chassis, which are the primary components of the motor. I already elaborated on the diaphragm, the voice coil is also new and has an impedance closer to 350 Ohms, and the magnet chassis had to be revised to accommodate the larger excursion. So if your definition of "driver" is different acoustically relevant elements, then this a new driver. From a manufacturing standpoint, it's much harder to build and costs us up to 3 times as much as the original SYS40. To me, those differences make it a new transducer.

Happy Easter everyone!

 

[rafaelo]

Definitely a 5 series driver, just not absolutely sure it's the 528480 and it's the cups/baffle that are holding the driver at an angle.

Why you are so sure? Drop claims that the 58X driver is the same size with the other 6 series and I think all the 5 series has smaller size driver.

If you have inside information then is OK but if it is by rumors or because you believe that the 58x is not so good this a different story.

 

[Mike F]

Sennheiser/Neumann managed to get the best out of the 560S driver diaphragm....end of story. : )

This should be a sticky.

The NDH 30 uses the diaphragm of the HD 560S. It's a polymer blend with extraordinary internal dampening, so afterringing after the initial impulse is minimal. At the audiophile team of Sennheiser/Sonova, we have done a multitude of listening tests (also for the HD 660S2) and found that it compromises brilliance and detail retrieval. This is partly because the internal damping is so strong that the initial impulse at high frequencies may not be replicated accurately (it's slightly "blunted"). Instead, we use the laminate material of the HD 800 S, which has slightly higher THD in the bass and more natural decay. Most importantly it accurately reproduces impulses compared to the polymer blend material. Interestingly you can't see that in a frequency response. Even if you equalize the different materials in the same shell for the same treble amplitude, the laminate will subjectively sound as if it had more treble due to the more natural initial impulse response and also possibly due to increased decay.
Ultimately, it's a decision between minimal decay and cleaner bass or faithful treble impulse response, and it's okay to have a preference one way or the other. We as a team unanimously decided on superior detail retrieval as the raison d'etre for all of our audiophile headphones except the entry-level, and I believe the HD 660S2 is a great representative of that philosophy.

Well, he said what he said, but for me higher THD is not the way to go. For me it's the incredibly low THD of the NDH 20 and 30 that make them so revealing and useful. It's just possible to hear so much more, even at lower volumes. Increasing THD to increase (perceived) bass and delay length is just not what I want - that's the main reason why I was never interested in the HD800S as a replacement/upgrade for the HD800. But hey, I'm a pro musician and studio monitor guy. The aims/ideals are arguably different for audiophile sound/pure listening pleasure, as opposed to accuracy. I have to say though that I don't see why/how lower THD and faster decay results in a less faithful treble response, or rather, I can't understand or agree that it would result in poorer detail retrieval. Maybe increased THD has the same effect as it does in the bass - it results in more perceived detail retrieval?