[whirlwind]

I listen very carefully to different gear and headphones, and experienced a subtle change in my new 650's in the first 60 hours. They seemed to settle out, sounding slightly more treble oriented/detailed than my older pair with the same drivers.

I then experienced another shift from 80-150 hours, where they exceeded the presentation of the older pair I had by a noticeable margin. So I do believe in burn in myself, and think it's still open to the listener whether they hear changes or not. I also believe in brain burn in, and definitely physical burn in for dynamic drivers, capacitors, tubes, etc.

+1
 
I agree , my HD650 took about 75 hours , I am guessing here, as it was used and had some hours on it when i got it.
 
I have had some tubes need 50 hours plus to settle in.

 

[Badfish5446]

I believe in burn-in for tubes and mechanical "break-in" for transducers and ear pads.  I've never noticed a major change but subtle differences have been present.  This typically equates to a slight increase in bass depth, an increase in bass control and a slight relaxation or smoothing out of treble frequencies.  This has always taken 100 or less hours in my own personal experience.  I am also a firm believer that anyone who claim's a night and day difference between 1 hour and 400 hours is just experiencing a psychoacoustic event.  If you're wearing your headphones during "burn-in" you will also notice subtle changes in the pad depth which can affect the sound.

 

[donlin]

@Cakensaur
 that's interesting you chose the HD 650 after the latest and greatest. I find if to be superior than about 90% of all headphones out there - but IMO, those other 10%-ish beat the HD 650 hands down, namely HE-6, Stax SR 09 (& maybe 07), MDR R10, some of the Audeze's, and maybe AKG K712. Do you have any experience comparing to those? That would be neat to hear about it.

Here's a list of phones I have put the 650's up against in my own system and prefer the 650's:
Audeze LCD-2, LCD-3, LCD-X
HiFiMan HE500, HE560
Oppo PM-1
Sennheiser HD800
Fostex TH 900
Stax 007
Grado GS1000, PS1000, PS500e
Sony Z7

 

[Hachiko270296]

Here's a list of phones I have put the 650's up against in my own system and prefer the 650's:
Audeze LCD-2, LCD-3, LCD-X
HiFiMan HE500, HE560
Oppo PM-1
Sennheiser HD800
Fostex TH 900
Stax 007
Grado GS1000, PS1000, PS500e
Sony Z7

Which did you prefer out of the LCD-2 and HD650 for lush vocals?

 

[donlin]

Which did you prefer out of the LCD-2 and HD650 for lush vocals?

650. The LCD-2 was slightly more grainy.

 

[Hachiko270296]

Fazor?

 

[donlin]

Fazor?

No, actually one of the last ones made before the fazor was added.

 

[DavidA]

650. The LCD-2 was slightly more grainy.

 

Fazor?

I have a fazor version and its about the same as the HD-650 IMO, the non-fazor was just a tiny bit more grainy than the HD-650 when I heard them at a friends house in Japan a few years ago along with his HD-650, but you know acoustic memory is not that good so YMMV.

 

[CanadianMaestro]

  Hello everyone.  I have been listening to My HD650's now for about a week.  I did not want to make any hasty judgements.  I am coming from a pair of Grado RS1i phones.  I love the Grado sound.  I love how I feel so close to the music, and can hear so much texture detail and other small nuances.  But, I also like to listen at a rather loud level, and the Grado phones have definitely damaged my hearing over a year of listening.  
 
 
At first, I HATED the HD650's.  They were of course dark and laid back in comparision, but it was the muddiness in the lower midrange that had me worried.  It was AWFUL.  Muddy, slow, just plain BAD.  If you don't believe in Break-in, then I don't know what to tell you, other than after putting about 75 hours on them at this point, they sound like a totally different headphone.  I ran pink noise through them at night, and every morning I would notice the sound had improved.  
 
Now, yes, they still sound a bit distant and laid back, but, they have PLENTY of treble energy.  Not super 'airy', but more than enough to satisfy.  The mids are excellent, and that lower midrange muddiness is almost totally gone.  Things are much, much clearer now.  
 
Now, they still aren't the most snappy and dynamic of  headphones.  They don't have the powerful transient 'snap' of the Grados, but they also can be played at high volumes with no fatigue whatsoever, and that is a HUGE deal to me.  I am expecting them to continue to get better as they break-in, as well.  After literally hating them at first, they now are a pleasant listen.
 
Also, I use a tube amp with them.  At first it was much harder to tube roll, as they are more forgiving than the Grados, and somewhat hide the small differences in tubes.  But as I have listened and become more familiar with the sound signature, I must say the right tubes are a NECESSITY if you are using these with a tube amp.  Tubes that sounded like world beaters with my Grados can be a muddy mess with these.  So far, the tubes that match the HD650's the absolute best are Tung Sol, especially the early 1950's Tung-Sol 12AX7 long gray plate.  
 
 
That is all for now...
 
Andrew

 
 
Thumbs up, Andrew! My one Grado gets much less head-time for a long time. 650 and 560 rule here in my cave.
Burn-in seems to work for some HPs.
 
cheers

 

[xkonfuzed]

Hey guys. So I auditioned the HD800 along with some other high-end headphones today, wanted to share my impressions and compare them to the HD650's. 
 

 

 
The audio chain was a Meridian Director DAC into an HDVA800/Oppo HA-1. This setup costs as much as makes no difference $3,000. This is as good as its going to get in terms of amplification, and I'm comparing it to my $600 setup - just something to keep in mind. 
 
Auditioning headphones with music that isn't your own is always confusing as you don't know what to expect, luckily though there were a lot of songs that I know and have heard many times. 
 
1) HD800: Where do I start? This headphone really ticks all the boxes. The amount of detail is astonishing. As cliche as it sounds, you really do hear things you've never head before. The overall presentation is wide and spacious, everything is spaced out and every instrument is easily distinguishable from the other. The bass decay is QUICK. Drums and kicks had a lot of authority. Its bassier than I thought i would be to be honest. It had a lot of subbass, but very textured and tight. They have the same magical quality to the mids as the 650's have. BUT, here's the thing: they were not as musical as the HD650's, I also felt like the 650 had a bit more weight to vocals (particularly male vocals). Make no mistake though, the HD800 is clearly the superior headphone sonically, but the difference is nowhere near as the price jump may indicate. If I was to upgrade (which I probably wont, and I really mean this), this would be the headphone I would choose. 
 
2) HE-400i: Ok, we've toned the price down a bit and this is becoming a better comparison. We're still on the same DAC/Amp though. The HE-400i was a kind of bittersweet headphone. I have a love/hate relationship with it. Firstly, the bass was perfect for the price range its in. Very tight and texture, with fast decay and a lot of impact. However, everywhere else, I found the HD650 to be better. Firstly, the Senns clearly had better mids. More forward, smoother, and more detailed (as crazy as that might sound). The sound is thicker on the Senns. I also think the HD650's have superior imaging and soundstage depth and layering. He-400's were noticeably quicker, with more detail in the highs and better extension, also better bass. But I also found that it doesn't quite have the transparency of the Senns. This is a side-grade to the HD650, not an upgrade. 
 
3) AKG K712: I didn't spend much time with this headphone as I had to go, but with the time I had with it I was impressed. First, let me tell you that I hated the K701. I found it much too thin and lacking bass. It was not a musical headphone whatsoever. However, the K712 seemed to improve upon that headphone. First, I don't find them particularly lacking bass anymore. Sure, they could use a bit more dB's in the midbass but not much. The shoutiness in the upper mids is gone, the treble was smoothened out, and strangely the soundstage got a narrower? The AKG is a quicker headphone. It has less bass impact but a bit better extension than the HD650. As always, the HD650's mids do beat it. Sometimes the AKG's vocals sounded a bit raw, on the contrary the Senn's mids are much smoother and more intimate. I also feel like instruments sound better on the HD650's. 
 
I've made the same writeup but with comparisons to the DT880, you can find that on the DT880 thread if you want to read. 

 

[bracko]

Nice effort. As I wrote in DT880 thread, for me there is no single point where HD650 beats HE-400i. HE-400i has better and more extended bass, better and more detailed midrange and definitely more extended treble. 400i also has better imaging, better soundstage with better layering. As I stated before I live with these headphones and listen to them every day. I never listen to classical music through my DT880 besause strings and woodwinds simply don't sound correct through them. I prefer HD650 and HE-400i for that. 

 

[MLGrado]

I understand that the brain acclimating is part of the experience.  I am sure that is part of it.  I am also sure that does not account for all of it.  I seriously disliked the HD650 at first.    And it wasn't because of the lack of treble, tonal balance, or anything like that.  I found them to be very technically deficient and inarticulate in the upper bass and lower midrange.  They were in my opinion a muddy mess.  Over time their clarity notably increased, to the point I no longer focus on that one aspect and can enjoy all the good things these headphones actually do.  
 
Also, I did most of my break-in without listening.  I would do maybe 30 or 45 minutes of listening, and break-in with pink noise for 8 to 10 hours per evening.  
 
 
I consider myself a moderate in these type of things.  I think there are extreme views on both sides.  I think break-in for things with mechanical, moving parts like headphones and speakers is a real thing.  I would be a skeptic, though, when it comes to things like cables.  
 
 
And now as I think about it, no, there hasn't been a drastic change in the OVERALL sound of the HD650's.  But there has been a notable change in the area I found to be deficient.  Not drastic, but certainly noteworthy.  Noteworthy enough to change my experience from very disappointing to quite enjoyable.  And I just can't believe that simply acclimating to the sound can account for all of that.  

 

[CanadianMaestro]

1. Expectation bias exists with new gear.
2. EB is proportionate to the cost of the new gear.
2. Over time, some amt of "wallet guilt" sets in, and owners are more likely to approve of the new gear's SQ. Less likely to concede "no improvement".
 
Not saying that what we hear is false. Just that brain adaptation explains much of the break-in phenomenon.
 
cheers

 

[mikoss]

...
1) HD800: ... They have the same magical quality to the mids as the 650's have. BUT, here's the thing: they were not as musical as the HD650's, I also felt like the 650 had a bit more weight to vocals (particularly male vocals). Make no mistake though, the HD800 is clearly the superior headphone sonically, but the difference is nowhere near as the price jump may indicate. If I was to upgrade (which I probably wont, and I really mean this), this would be the headphone I would choose. 

 
Nice impressions, nice job. I would equate the vocal weight to the upper midrange scoop that exists on the HD-800's from 1kHz to 3.5kHz (about 5dB below the HD-650's). I have found certain setups can work against the 800's, creating a colder sounding response, where tonality/body sounds off, but the right gear can really shine. I think these headphones require a much more thought out setup than the 650's. 

Spoiler: More thoughts on the 800's.

As for the price, I consider them cheaper and still competitive with current flagships... if people find the 800's expensive, I'd really like to know their thoughts on headphones such as LCD-3's, HE-1k's, and SR-009. Looking into dynamic drivers, what compares? TH-900s sound cleaner, but they're closed and a very clean sounding v-shaped presentation. The TH-900's are great cans if you can get them for a good price, but they're just different.
 
I used to think the HD-650's were expensive at $500 here, but after buying a lot of mid-fi headphones for around the same price, I consider them a steal at $400 or less. I also thought the HD-800's were ridiculous at $1500 Cad, but they're now selling in Canada new for below $1000 USD... Paying $2500+ for the LCD-3's really allows you to understand the value of other headphones. I have read a lot of opinions and reviews from people I respect on the HE-1k's, and by most accounts they are very good, but I haven't heard many people who think they're a total replacement for the HD-800's. I also don't think they're a FOTM, but you need to consider the cost and performance. (For planars, I would consider HE-560's to be a much better proposition as far as cost and performance go, personally).
 
It may sound like I think the HD-800's are the very best myself, but I honestly don't, and am skeptical there ever will be one headphone that does everything perfectly. I think the 650's do well enough to be the kings of mid-fi in many regards, and I think the 800's are very good value for their price. I also don't think they're an essential upgrade, but I do think that if you value with the 650's do very well, you'll also appreciate their presentation. 

 

[Hachiko270296]

Thing is with comparimg the HD800 and HD650 they are complete opposites. The HD650 is a warm headphone with a mid focused sound while the HD800 is a treble focused sound. Leaner sound with thinner mids. A leaner, drier sound is always going to sound more detailed than a warmer, lusher headphone.

I prefer the magical mids of the HD650, the HD800s mods were too lean and dry.