[Mike F]

The HD650 is the slower less revealing (or more veiled)

I probably shouldn't say this, and I've no desire to get into this all over again, but are you sure you're not equating 'darker' with less revealing and 'brighter' with more revealing? I'm not talking about comparison to the HD 660 S, I just mean in general. The presence of more treble energy (brighter) is NOT the same thing as more detail.

 

[vaibhavp]

I probably shouldn't say this, and I've no desire to get into this all over again, but are you sure you're not equating 'darker' with less revealing and 'brighter' with more revealing? I'm not talking about comparison to the HD 660 S, I just mean in general. The presence of more treble energy (brighter) is NOT the same thing as more detail.

Mike I think this question has been answered quite satisfactorily by users on this thread. Asking it again is unfair and would be infuriating for them.

I suppose you are not looking for most resolving hp anyways. Thats why you have stuck with hd650. Then why compare resolving ability?

 

[Mike F]

Mike I think this question has been answered quite satisfactorily by users on this thread. Asking it again is unfair and would be infuriating for them.

I suppose you are not looking for most resolving hp anyways. Thats why you have stuck with hd650. Then why compare resolving ability?

I don't feel that this question has ever been answered satisfactorily, but I don't mean to be inflammatory in any way - I'm just making the general point that brightness is not the same as detail, Indeed, it's not actually even related, properly speaking, but brighter does always sound at least superficially more detailed. And BTW I know what a more resolving hp than the HD 650 sounds like. I have the HD 800!

But to answer the highlighted part of your post, the original reason for asking these questions earlier in the thread was because of this:-

'Very good treble response should give the impression of smooth detail. So many people mistake a bright, sizzly response for good detail. It just ain't so.

'While the HD 660 S was a bit brighter than the other two, it also lacked the nuanced resolution and dynamic balance of the 600/650. Low level details were lost.....'

I don't need/want a rehash of all this (PLEASE), I'm just answering your question.

 

[vaibhavp]

I don't feel that this question has ever been answered satisfactorily, but I don't mean to be inflammatory in any way - I'm just making the general point that brightness is not the same as detail, Indeed, it's not actually even related, properly speaking, but brighter does always sound at least superficially more detailed. And BTW I know what a more resolving hp than the HD 650 sounds like. I have the HD 800!

But to answer the highlighted part of your post, the original reason for asking these questions earlier in the thread was because of this:-

'Very good treble response should give the impression of smooth detail. So many people mistake a bright, sizzly response for good detail. It just ain't so.

'While the HD 660 S was a bit brighter than the other two, it also lacked the nuanced resolution and dynamic balance of the 600/650. Low level details were lost.....'

I don't need/want a rehash of all this (PLEASE), I'm just answering your question.

This exact point was covered previously.

It is tighter, faster decay, more dynamic version of hd650. Remember?

 

[TheoS53]

I probably shouldn't say this, and I've no desire to get into this all over again, but are you sure you're not equating 'darker' with less revealing and 'brighter' with more revealing? I'm not talking about comparison to the HD 660 S, I just mean in general. The presence of more treble energy (brighter) is NOT the same thing as more detail.

Absolutely. Accuracy and detail go hand in hand...I'd go so far as to say that (in this case), they are the same thing. Any headphones that accentuate any particular part of the frequency spectrum is, by definition, distorting the sound...distortion = less accuracy = less detail...even if it appears more detailed, that doesn't mean that it's actually more detailed.

 

[DavidA]

I don't feel that this question has ever been answered satisfactorily, but I don't mean to be inflammatory in any way - I'm just making the general point that brightness is not the same as detail, Indeed, it's not actually even related, properly speaking, but brighter does always sound at least superficially more detailed. And BTW I know what a more resolving hp than the HD 650 sounds like. I have the HD 800!

But to answer the highlighted part of your post, the original reason for asking these questions earlier in the thread was because of this:-

'Very good treble response should give the impression of smooth detail. So many people mistake a bright, sizzly response for good detail. It just ain't so.

'While the HD 660 S was a bit brighter than the other two, it also lacked the nuanced resolution and dynamic balance of the 600/650. Low level details were lost.....'

I don't need/want a rehash of all this (PLEASE), I'm just answering your question.

I can see why you are asking since many just say the HD660S is more detailed since its brighter and more dynamic but I'd say that the extra brightness does get harsh at times since its not smooth like the HD650 so I'm going to say the HD660S its not as detailed as the HD650 and to your point of the HD800 being very detailed and bright but also has never been harsh to me. The same applies to my RS2e which is much brighter than the HD650 or HD660S but its smooth, detailed and extended but has never sounded harsh to me.

 

[pietcux]

I don't feel that this question has ever been answered satisfactorily, but I don't mean to be inflammatory in any way - I'm just making the general point that brightness is not the same as detail, Indeed, it's not actually even related, properly speaking, but brighter does always sound at least superficially more detailed. And BTW I know what a more resolving hp than the HD 650 sounds like. I have the HD 800!

But to answer the highlighted part of your post, the original reason for asking these questions earlier in the thread was because of this:-

'Very good treble response should give the impression of smooth detail. So many people mistake a bright, sizzly response for good detail. It just ain't so.

'While the HD 660 S was a bit brighter than the other two, it also lacked the nuanced resolution and dynamic balance of the 600/650. Low level details were lost.....'

I don't need/want a rehash of all this (PLEASE), I'm just answering your question.

Mike here is my challenge to you:

I will be in Helsinki from 15-May to 18-May 2018. I will bring my HD660S and my WM1A with me. As it is a business trip, I do not know as of now which night I could give you the chance to listen yourself, but again you will get your chance. Then after you can speak by your own experience. I know you have to drive a long time from your location, but if you want, I am there.
As you are an Englishman you should like challenges, shouldn't you?
Cheers

Peter

I am writing this listening to Mahler # 3 piece # 2 with the HD660S balanced via the HDVA 600. This sounds just so incredible detailed.

 

[DavidA]

@pietcux, nice gesture . So when will you be in Hawaii, I'd love to hear the Sony DAP

 

[Mike F]

Mike here is my challenge to you:

I will be in Helsinki from 15-May to 18-May 2018. I will bring my HD660S and my WM1A with me. As it is a business trip, I do not know as of now which night I could give you the chance to listen yourself, but again you will get your chance. Then after you can speak by your own experience. I know you have to drive a long time from your location, but if you want, I am there.
As you are an Englishman you should like challenges, shouldn't you?
Cheers

Peter

I am writing this listening to Mahler # 3 piece # 2 with the HD660S balanced via the HDVA 600. This sounds just so incredible detailed.

Peter, I genuinely appreciate your offer. Also, let me say, I'm not calling into question your, or anyone else's, judgement of the HD 660 S. I'm simply making the general point that 'bright' doesn't equal 'detailed'. Alarm bells start ringing for me every time I read someone describe the HD 650 as dark and 'veiled'. I'm sure that the vast majority equate the word 'veiled' with a loss of detail, and it's just a misconception.

Unfortunately I have four gigs from 15-19 May with only the 17th free. The band I'm with on the 18-19 quite often play in Helsinki, but unfortunately on this occasion we'll be in Vasa. Glad you're enjoying the HDVA 600. I think the Senn amps are really very good.

 

[amartignano]

My two cents: I think that the Hd660S has one of the best real detail accompanied by smooth and relaxed response among the dynamic headphones I've heard in my hifi life.

 

[donlin]

It’s really unfortunate that words like sizzley, bright and fatiguing are thrown around when describing the HD660S. It just isn’t any of those things. It paints a very misleading picture. And I’m one who never thought of the HD650 as veiled.

 

[amartignano]

It’s really unfortunate that words like sizzley, bright and fatiguing are thrown around when describing the HD660S. It just isn’t any of those things. It paints a very misleading picture. And I’m one who never thought of the HD650 as veiled.

Or "grainy". Yes, very misleading.

 

[pietcux]

@pietcux, nice gesture . So when will you be in Hawaii, I'd love to hear the Sony DAP

Hawaii, even though I work for a huge American company, is out of reach for me. The company is on a tight budget, even the CEO would not travel there without a good reason. But if ever, who knows.....

 

[Sigmaaa]

Mark, you don't make sense, a dark headphone is less detailed because it plays the treble details at a lower volume than the rest of the spectrum, so the treble details are drowned in the music. A good detailed headphone has to be neutral. For example, the HD800 is not as detailed in the midrange as HD660s, in my opinion, because the midrange is drowned by treble spikes that hurt the ear. HD660s aren't brighter (maybe 1-2dB difference) and you can easily see from the graphs, but you can hear more detail, that's why some consider it harsh when they compare it to the HD650's slow, veiled (though relaxing) sound.

 

[donlin]

I've tried to stay clear of the "which one is more resolving" discussion because to me they are all very resolving. I guess at the most basic level resolution means being able to hear everything that's on the recording. Between the HD650 660S and 800S, which I currently or have very recently owned, there is nothing that I can hear on one but can't hear on another. They each emphasize certain things more than the others but each one seems to present all the info. I would say that the 800S is the one that plays the game of more apparent resolution by hyping the high frequencies more so than the 660S.