[MixMasterMan]

I've never compared the QH4 (or Magni 3) to any higher end amps because I've never had any better amps (the iFI CAN is arguably higher end, I suppose, and I do have that), so I suspect you and others have heard the the HD 650 and/or HD 660S on more refined setups, and that is perhaps part of the difference as well.

This is where I think the differences in the HD660S and HD650 is most noticeable is when different amps are used: HD650 seems to pair better with a OTL or hybrid amp while the HD660S seems to pair good/great with almost any SS amp. Those that like the HD660S are usually using a SS amp while many that still prefer the HD650 (like me) are using a OTL amp and I suspect that the higher output impedance of the OTL amp has better synergy with the HD650 while the HD660S has better synergy with SS amps due to its lower impedance.

With all things considered, I would think that the more neutral set up is the better way (as a base line) to evaluate things like headphones. Wouldn't you agree? Once you start adding things into the chain that color or have better synergy with equipment, it's not an even playing field anymore.

 

[kman1211]

With all things considered, I would think that the more neutral set up is the better way (as a base line) to evaluate things like headphones. Wouldn't you agree? Once you start adding things into the chain that color or have better synergy with equipment, it's not an even playing field anymore.

Actually I personally agree, but there is also the quality aspect to factor in, there is a big difference between a cheaper neutral system and a high-end one, which is why I want to get a nice neutral SS amp(probably a violectric) as my next amp and get a nice multi-bit DAC to help eliminate any digital artifacts that may be influenced by lesser gear, not to mention some computers can also add some artifacts, especially when using USB, I've built enough desktops to know not all motherboards are equal in terms of USB dirtiness/issues and no amount of USB filtering will fix the problematic ones. Some of the top tube amps are neutral but they are very expensive.

 

[DavidA]

With all things considered, I would think that the more neutral set up is the better way (as a base line) to evaluate things like headphones. Wouldn't you agree? Once you start adding things into the chain that color or have better synergy with equipment, it's not an even playing field anymore.

The problem is what you hear as "neutral" and what I hear as "neutral" may or may not be the same. I think it makes more sense to evaluate a headphone on your system since its what you will be using to listen to a particular headphone. A review/evaluation needs to have the parameters (amp/DAC, source) noted so that it has some reference point to others and its why I noted the amp (BH Crack + a few more: Elise, MicroZOTL2, Icon HP-8mk2, HA-501, Liquid Carbon and Dark Star) that I used when listening to the HD660S, HD650, HD6XX and a few other headphones so that when someone reads my impressions they will know what gear was used and a have a better understanding on where I'm coming from.

Actually I personally agree but there is also the quality aspect to factor in, there is a big difference between a cheaper neutral system and a high-end one, which is why I want to get a nice neutral SS amp(probably a violectric) as my next amp and get a nice multi-bit DAC to help eliminate any digital artifacts that may be influenced by less gear. Some of the top tube amps are neutral but they are very expensive.

Agree that Violectric amps/DACs are great and pretty much what I'd consider neutral. A friend has a V281 that I liked but the G109 that she also has gets you pretty close for 1/4 the price IMO.

 

[MixMasterMan]

Actually I personally agree, but there is also the quality aspect to factor in, there is a big difference between a cheaper neutral system and a high-end one, which is why I want to get a nice neutral SS amp(probably a violectric) as my next amp and get a nice multi-bit DAC to help eliminate any digital artifacts that may be influenced by lesser gear, not to mention some computers can also add some artifacts, especially when using USB, I've built enough desktops to know not all motherboards are equal in terms of USB dirtiness/issues and no amount of USB filtering will fix the problematic ones. Some of the top tube amps are neutral but they are very expensive.

I hear you, but if say I am already getting exact replication of my DAC/interface line out signal with my relatively inexpensive SS HP amp, what would I possibly gain from pairing my DAC/interface with an expensive one?

 

[kman1211]

I hear you, but if say I am already getting exact replication of my DAC/interface line out signal with my relatively inexpensive SS HP amp, what would I possibly gain from pairing my DAC/interface with an expensive one?

More substance/solidity to the sound, better depth, more precise imaging, larger sense of scale, more powerful dynamics, greater dynamic range, better handling of complex tracks, more low level detail, etc. Essentially better realism. Pair with a higher-end DAC and the difference is more noticeable. When I'm referring to the system being higher end, I'm talking both the amp and dac, lower end dacs can sound quite harsh, hollow, compressed, and thin compared to the better ones and an amp and headphone can be stifled by the dac.

 

[MixMasterMan]

More substance/solidity to the sound, better depth, more precise imaging, larger sense of scale, more powerful dynamics, greater dynamic range, better handling of complex tracks, more low level detail, etc. Essentially better realism. Pair with a higher-end DAC and the difference is more noticeable. When I'm referring to the system being higher end, I'm talking both the amp and dac, lower end dacs can sound quite harsh, hollow, compressed, and thin compared to the better ones and an amp and headphone can be stifled by the dac.

I've a close studio engineer friend that is obsessed with DAC's for some reason (I think he's mad), and I've had the rare opportunity to listen to several high end DAC's over the years. Lavry Blue, Benchmark, Qes PAD 2, JCF Latte, 2 Mytek boxes (including the recent Brooklyn), Lynx Aurora, and a few more that I don't remember. Over $10-15k in DAC's alone. I am very fortunate to have this experience, and am very familiar with DAC characteristics and their role. After a certain point, the difference's in DAC's become negligible. To me, either they convert good, or they don't. One I do remember, the JCF Latte, was/is over $4k, and it colored the sound in a way I didn't like. The RME FF800 is a pro grade audio interface/DAC that I've used for over a dozen years, that stands up with all of these other DAC's. It's not the absolute best, but more that good enough, and I know the sound inside and out. To the point that even after A/B'ing with those aforementioned monster DAC's, I haven't felt the need to upgrade.

Given the opportunity, I would be interested in trying a top class audiophile HP amp with my setup. Though while a higher end headphone amp may offer better or enhanced performance, no matter the price or prestige, if it changes the sound from the source, I wouldn't/couldn't use it. It HAS to match the signal my interface puts out to the monitors. My ear is trained & experienced enough to know how something relates or translates. Considering that the cheap amp I use now reproduces the signal the same as when I hear it through studio monitors (dynamics/tone/imaging/etc), I really don't require anything more. It is a 98-99% null. I just need an amp that does it's job and doesn't get in the way by adding or subtracting anything. Whether it is $50 or $500, it doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is if it does the job I need it to do. It's all relative, anyway. I work on my own music, and after all is said and done, it becomes a digital file that I have to compare with everything else out there on various separate devices. So, it's ALL relative. - So given my sonic goal, do I have a high end enough set up to properly/objectively evaluate music, mixes, dynamic range, EQ, headphones, speakers, etc? - Yes.

With that said, sometime in the next couple of years, I will be upgrading my interface/converters. I'm almost certain that I'll be getting a UFX+. I've heard it compared with several other high end DAC's (including mine), and their converters won the shootout to me, and are truly summit level excellence. It's a $2,800 box (My FF800 was $1,600 when it was released in 2005). Will I need to upgrade my $70 HP amp to match the comparative cost of the UFX+ ? - Not likely. If it nulls with my current box, it will do the same with anything else.

 

[Mike F]

Though while a higher end headphone amp may offer better or enhanced performance, no matter the price or prestige, if it changes the sound from the source, I wouldn't/couldn't use it. It HAS to match the signal my interface puts out to the monitors.

I think this is the heart of the matter. The truth is that listening on headphones is never the same as listening on monitors, even extremely good monitors. I have ATC100ASL's and I still hear some things more easily on (good) headphones than on those monitors. That's exactly why producers use both monitors and headphones.

A more expensive hp amp can be as neutral as your current one but still have the advantages that kman1211 lists above..........

 

[MixMasterMan]

I think this is the heart of the matter. The truth is that listening on headphones is never the same as listening on monitors, even extremely good monitors. I have these:- https://vintageking.com/atc-loudspeakers-scm100asl and I still hear some things more easily on (good) headphones than on those monitors. That's exactly why producers use both monitors and headphones.

A more expensive hp amp can be as neutral as your current one but still have the advantages that kman1211 lists above..........

I agree. That's why I shoot for neutral. So that signal relation is as close as possible. All headphones are colored or compromised in some way compared to good monitors, but they are good for zoning in on reverb/delay amount and tails, very quiet sounds, and certain spatial elements. 3-way ATC's eh? I'm not worthy - The friend I talked about just got 3-way HEDD Type 20's. Designed by the same guy that did the Adam line with the ribbon tweeters.

 

[RuiPP]

I bought the HD660S and tried them with the iFi Micro IDSD BL. My first reaction is that the bass quantity and punch aren’t enough (I tried some electronic music). Do you believe they can get “better” (for my taste) with the burn in or pad burn?
When some say that other Sennheiser’s models are warmer and darker than the HD660s do they mean those models are more bass-oriented?
I agree that listening on headphones is never the same as listening on monitors. Do you think headphones have a more neutral and natural tonality in general?
Thank you very much.

 

[Mike F]

I can't believe that I didn't read this before! This sounds like a very good and detailed description of the sound differences between the HD 650 and HD 660 S. A lot of it ties in well both with what Tyll said and what people have been saying here.

'The sound is a lot like the HD650 but also differs. It is a very balanced and tonally ‘correct’ headphone. One of the happy few in this price bracket.
It differs with the HD650 in other areas than the tonal balance which is more similar than not.
Bass on the HD660S is noticeably ‘tighter’ and better defined. The HD650 can be slightly ‘soft/wooly-ish/warm’ compared to the HD660S. Mids are slightly cleaner and realistic sounding with ever so slightly less/different ‘clarity/presence’ (3kHz presence) perhaps.

Mids sound a little ‘cleaner’ and more ‘dynamic’ and maybe a tad more ‘forward’.
Some people ‘turn around’ the effect of dynamics and use the word opposite to reality.
When music is compressed you will hear more smaller details than when not compressed. You need to turn up the HD660S a bit more to hear the same amount of small details so it actually compresses less than the HD650.

One has to realize that ‘finer details’ are not found in the upper treble (related to rise-time) but are actually in the 2kHz to 5kHz range, where the ears are most sensitive.
The HD660S has about 3dB less signal there which is audible. For that reason the HD600 and HD650, both having a higher level there, can be found to show slightly more ‘finer’ detail or the other way around the HD660S lacking somewhat..
This too has an effect on the perceived dynamics. The HD650 performs better in this department. The small ‘bump’ at around 1.2kHz, however, makes it slightly more forward sounding. So in essence it sounds a little more ‘forward’ and a tiny bit less ‘detailed’ in the mids. These differences are small.

One could say the slight ‘veil’ some talk about when discussing the HD650 is not present here. Others may say it has a ‘blacker’ background.
Treble is not elevated at all and also not subdued but in the correct amount. I would not say it is ‘better’ than that of the HD650 but with the ‘improved’ dynamics it would be easy to conclude the highs are maybe slightly crisper / better defined.
Think a HD650 with a ‘cleaner’ and more ‘dynamic’ sound. A less ‘romantic’ HD650 perhaps. A bit fresher/modern version of the HD650. Slightly less ‘polite’.
The HD650, however, is a bit smoother/pleasant in the fine nuances.'

 

[Mike F]

It's from here:- https://diyaudioheaven.wordpress.com/headphones/measurements/brands-s-se/hd660s/

 

[donlin]

I bought the HD660S and tried them with the iFi Micro IDSD BL. My first reaction is that the bass quantity and punch aren’t enough (I tried some electronic music). Do you believe they can get “better” (for my taste) with the burn in or pad burn?
When some say that other Sennheiser’s models are warmer and darker than the HD660s do they mean those models are more bass-oriented?
I agree that listening on headphones is never the same as listening on monitors. Do you think headphones have a more neutral and natural tonality in general?
Thank you very much.

None of the better Sennheiser models are known for having lots of bass. They would generally be considered neutral as compared to a bass head type of headphone. The 660S has good quality bass and appealing weight that is well defined and quick but does not have full extension where as the HD800s has more extension but not as much bass weight.
I know I'm in the minority on this, but IMO good headphones are more neutral than speakers tonally and rhythmically, have much better bass control and resolution. The reason for that is no room influence on the sound. The only thing headphones lack is the scale and size that speakers can provide. After listening to headphones all the time, when I go to an audio show, even the best speaker systems sound bloated and slow and bleached out tonally.

 

[Mike F]

when I go to an audio show, even the best speaker systems sound bloated and slow and bleached out tonally.

I totally sympathise! Speaker systems at Hi-Fi shows almost always sound terrible, precisely because the rooms that they set them up in are terrible. BUT, high end monitors in a good room or the control room of a studio are a completely different story.......

However, there are many things to be said in favour of headphones, not the least being price!

 

[Sigmaaa]

To come close to the clarity of headphones on speakers, the room must be large enough and of the right shape, the speakers and listener positions must be chosen carefully. Ideally the speakers and the listener have to be far from the walls and even some acoustic room treatment has to be used.
But on the other hand, the sense of scale of loudspeakers is impossible to reproduce on headphone, the headphone and speaker sounds are two completely different experiences.

 

[RuiPP]

None of the better Sennheiser models are known for having lots of bass. They would generally be considered neutral as compared to a bass head type of headphone.

Thanks. Do you think open cans are mainly for classical, jazz, acoustic?