[jworl]

Quote:

Every day I read through pages of blather and nonsense looking for comments from someone who has actually heard the HD700.
 
The signal to noise ratio in this thread is pretty bad.
 

 
I concur. Can an admin change the title of this thread to "Let's argue about the HD800"?

 

[Olias of Sunhillow]

Quote:

Personal choice - no problem.
 
But did you make the recording yourself so you can really say it was not present on the recording?

 
Nope. Just an educated guess based upon how the same recording sounds when played back via different gear. Imperfect, to be sure.
 
I respect the fact that you've used your own recordings to evaluate the HD800 -- it's persuasive evidence. But I can only base my evaluation on what I've experienced personally.
 
 

 

[logwed]

Quote:

I concur. Can an admin change the title of this thread to "Let's argue about the HD800"?

There isn't that much to say about an unreleased headphone, this is just how head-fi generates buzz, by arguing about speculations.
 
Quote:

That's interesting, good catch. Anyway, according to that chart it's true for violin, saxophone, etc. All my argument needs is for one of them to reach up into that range, for my point to be sufficiently made. 
 

There aren't really any instruments with primary tones that go above 10kHz, the music really happens below that. Above is overtones.
 

 

[ac500]

Obviously. And if you think overtones aren't absolutely vital... then you're missing a lot of the music.

 

[Zombie_X]

What a way to compare them! I would also agree that the HD800 adds to the music in a way I dislike. The HD800 seems to add more treble, and it's not always a good thing. I find the treble can be sibilant or edgy on most modern music. The treble, as you put, screems like it has a sheen to it. I think the treble is elevated to give the impression of hyper detail. Also it seems it has a more artificial soundstage. The stage sounds far too wide to be realistic. The closest thing I can compare the soundstage with is the K70* line. The HD800 has better depth and width but it still sound exaggerated.
 
As for the T1 I would classify it as premium dark chocolate.  The sound is quite strong yet smooth. I find the T1 to on equal grounds as far as resolution and detail goes. Sure the soundstage is smaller but to me it seems much more natural. Also it's not as treble heavy as the HD800 and the treble is smoother sounding. The mids also sound more lifelike and IMO are better than what the HD800 does. 
 
I've had the T1 long enough and have used the HD800 extensively when I borrowed a pair to know. The T1 screems a more natural and appealing sound, but granted the T1 is more colored than the HD800.
 
Quote:

I don't share that point of view, but I can understand it. To me, "revealing" implies that nothing is taken away or added. I feel like the HD800 adds something.
 
You know, I really like vanilla ice cream. To me, the T1 tastes just like vanilla ice cream. The HD800 tastes like vanilla ice cream with jimmies. Now, those jimmies sure can taste good at times, but most times I'd just like the ice cream without the sprinkles.
 
If the HD700 sounds like the HD800 without the jimmies, I will be very happy.

 

 

[arnaud]

As there's some misinformation flying around, and although this is not quite te topic of the thread:
 
1. The analogy between musical instruments and transducers is indeed non-sense. In the former case, you use the enclosure to amplify sounds and give the right tonality to the instrument. In the latter case, more often than not, you're trying to prevent added resonances or at least control them.
2. You can properly design a headphone cup with either wood or plastic but wood is probably much more accessible to a small maker than plastic  (both in terms if raw matter but also especially in consideration of the manufacturing process).
3. Neither wood or plastic are fundamentally bad from an engineering standpoint (self damping, density are not that different) but it's probably much easier for a large company like sennheiser to engineer / select a plastic with the right structural and hardness / aspect properties than look for appropriate wood.

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

A tube can measure flat but that doesn't matter since it's the entire amp that needs to be measured.  Most tube amps aren't going to measure flat from 5-20,000 Hz, usually because output transformers can get pretty expensive.  Here's a bunch of info on tube sound:
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tube_sound
 
Try the HD800 from your soundcard.  If it sounds too clinical I'd suggest an OTL tube amp which are pretty much the only amps I'd pair with that headphone.

Being very well damped, I think the HD800s sound better with an amp with higher output impedance...not necessarily an OTL (though still quite good). My WA22 has a high output impedance setting and the HD800s sound fabulous in that mode (quite a bit better than the low output impedance setting). Better than my (now sold WA2 which is a very good OTL amp) when I A-B'd them.
 
 
 

 

[purrin]

 
 

As there's some misinformation flying around, and although this is not quite te topic of the thread ...

 
Thank you. 

Quote:

To me the T1 tastes like pale, bland, generic store brand vanilla ice cream w/ guar gum.  The HD800 tastes like home made French vanilla w/ specks of real vanilla bean that you can see and taste w/ hints of that yellow egginess.  
 
You can keep the jimmies (whatever those are) and sprinkles.  

 
Edit - Haha, you don't want to know what we call 'jimmies' down here, probably wouldn't want that on your ice cream....
 

 
If the HD800 has jimmies, the HD700 has metal tacks. Sorry I couldn't resist. 

 
The OTL amps or amps with higher output Z (BA is 16ohm) will round out the bass and take away the dryness of the HD800. Higher output Z will even measurably bump up the bass at 100Hz over a very wide curve - effectively a very low Q parameter EQ setting. (A very high output Z such as 680ohms on vintage receivers will bump the HD800 at 100Hz up almost 4db - make it a subwoofer, although the bass will be mushy.) Nothing different than what Anax and n3rdling have already said. 
 
NOW BACK ON TOPIC: 
 
The HD700 is not as dry (between HD800 and HD650 in this aspect), but has other issues which will affect different people differently. For the 20th time, the HD700 overall treble is toned down a notch (my guess is 4-5db) from the HD800's; at the expense of a few sharper peaks and troughs. Now one more comment which I haven't made before: having a tube amp did not take away the edge of the HD700 peaks, at least not for me. If these peaks don't bother you, or if you listen to music which doesn't hit them often (classical, jazz, natural instruments, etc.) then SS amps are certainly viable.
 
Other options: For HD800, digital EQ, tone controls, or foam mods. HD700 will need surgical parametric EQ applied after measurements.

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

Quote:
 
Just to correct this point, regardless of taste a trumpet doesn't reach 10kHz even with harmonics:
 
http://www.independentrecording.net/irn/resources/freqchart/main_display.htm
 
The fundamental frequencies of a trumpet tap out at 1.2kHz.

I've played trumpet for about 35 years now. I did play in a big band and some local jazz bands before my life changed 180 degrees (took engineering at university, went to grad school, got married and had kids

), so I know the sound of the trumpet so very well. And to my ears, Miles Davis sounds most "real" on my LCD-2s (now sold) or LCD-3s.
 
Gotta say though, if you can swing owning both headphones (Audeze LCD-2/3 and HD800s), they are so different they are very complimentary cans and great contrasts to each other. I can definitely appreciate the clean sounding HD800s with wondrous sound stage. The LCD-2/3s bring some of the most realistic and organic bass/mids I've ever heard (headphones or speakers). The LCD-3s have improved on the sound staging to the point where I could sell off my HE-6s, but my HD800s ain't going anywhere.
 

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

As there's some misinformation flying around, and although this is not quite te topic of the thread:
 
1. The analogy between musical instruments and transducers is indeed non-sense. In the former case, you use the enclosure to amplify sounds and give the right tonality to the instrument. In the latter case, more often than not, you're trying to prevent added resonances or at least control them.
2. You can properly design a headphone cup with either wood or plastic but wood is probably much more accessible to a small maker than plastic  (both in terms if raw matter but also especially in consideration of the manufacturing process).
3. Neither wood or plastic are fundamentally bad from an engineering standpoint (self damping, density are not that different) but it's probably much easier for a large company like sennheiser to engineer / select a plastic with the right structural and hardness / aspect properties than look for appropriate wood.

Good points. I would argue that polymers could be produced with less variations from batch to batch than wood (not sure if mother nature is up on Six Sigma) and their properties could be "personalized" to better fit the application with additives/processing/etc...
 
But molds ain't cheap as you pointed out and the initial NRE (None Recoverable Expenses) are harder to justify for a smaller company than say for a giant like Sennheiser.
 

 

[logwed]

Quote:

Good points. I would argue that polymers could be produced with less variations from batch to batch than wood (not sure if mother nature is up on Six Sigma) and their properties could be "personalized" to better fit the application with additives/processing/etc...
 
But molds ain't cheap as you pointed out and the initial NRE (None Recoverable Expenses) are harder to justify for a smaller company than say for a giant like Sennheiser.
 

The bolded portion made my day
 
Yeah, there's got to be a point where the additional per unit cost of using wood (increased need for selection and quality control) becomes more than the initial cost of molds and other plastic-related expenses. I guess that explains why the big manufacturers generally use plastics (Sennheiser, AKG, Sony) and the smaller ones use wood (Audeze, Grado's higher end models).
 

 

[rhythmdevils]

 
Quote:

 
As for bright versus dark, I'll just say that I have never heard a real life violin or trumpet that did not have piercing and vibrant treble all the way up to 20khz (and probably beyond). You may very well dislike that, and that's okay, but don't disillusion yourself and others to think that real life is dark sounding.

Clearly violins do not have piercing treble.  They were developed for the purpose of pleasure. 
 
btw I played violin for some 8 years...

 

[purrin]

Trying to get back on topic...
 
RESOLUTION AND CLARITY
 

• HD800 (with amp and DAC of sufficient transparency, meaning $$$$, and with good recordings)
• <placeholder to indicate difference gap>
• HD700
• HD650

 
BASS ARTICULATION
 

• HD800
• HD700
• <placeholder to indicate difference gap>
• HD650 / HD600

 
TONALITY (comments, no particular order):

1. HD800: Treble shelved up past 5k. Slight bumps at 6k and 12-14k. The 6k bump has been said to be worse on the earlier models. The 12-14k bump is responsible for some graininess. Tube amps (or those amps of a certain design) can help with the grain. Despite dumps, overall treble is fairly smooth. No doubt a bright headphone.
2. HD700: Treble shelved up similarly to HD800, but not nearly as much. A few sharp narrow peaks and troughs. Musical preferences will play a huge part on whether these peaks will be "activated." Treble is a bit rougher and less refined compared to HD800
3. HD650: Depression around upper mids and lower treble. Probably accounts for its reputation of being laid-back sounding. Why some people feel the HD650 is veiled when combined with its muddier bass. 

 
The HD650 is no slouch - the resolution differences are not huge with the right amp and source.

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

 

Clearly violins do not have piercing treble.  They were developed for the purpose of pleasure. 
 
btw I played violin for some 8 years...

Nice!
 
 

 

[n3rdling]

 
Quote:

Being very well damped, I think the HD800s sound better with an amp with higher output impedance...not necessarily an OTL (though still quite good). My WA22 has a high output impedance setting and the HD800s sound fabulous in that mode (quite a bit better than the low output impedance setting). Better than my (now sold WA2 which is a very good OTL amp) when I A-B'd them.
 
 
 

I agree, I just said OTL to make things simpler since a lot of commercial headamps don't even have a listed Z out.  The impedance switch is pretty cool, do you know what the values are for that amp?