[FullBright1]

Everything I have read would point HD 600 being better for mastering than HD 650. Why? HD 650 bass is not perfect and it masks treble flaws too much (not that HD 600 is perfect either but probably it should be more neutral). Though, I've never heard them myself but judging by what everyone says that seems to be the case.

-
The HD600 is a bit veiled with not quite enough bass response, and this is sort of overly addressed in the HD650 as everyone who owns both, understands..( and there are perhaps millions ? who own both, as these Cans are the true original Gateway into Headphone addiction).
YET, after all these years, since the 580 - the 650 have been with us = Enter now, their refinement, their upgrade, their culminational definitive epilog, the fullness of their sonic evolutionary process= .........THE HD660-S.

===

 

[SilverEars]

-
The HD600 is a bit veiled with not quite enough bass response, and this is sort of overly addressed in the HD650 as everyone who owns both, understands..( and there are perhaps millions ? who own both, as these Cans are the true original Gateway into Headphone addiction).
YET, after all these years, since the 580 - the 650 have been with us = Enter now, their refinement, their upgrade, their culminational definitive epilog, the fullness of their sonic evolutionary process= .........THE HD660-S.

HD600 is bit veiled?! You mean the bass is not enough in comparison or meaning veiled in the sense of the highs? If you truely mean HD600 is veiled, does this mean 660s is not? If this is the case, it sounds like HD660s is brighter? Man, there is so much mixed impressions of the comparisons if 660s is involved. Personally, I found HD600 a bit more treble(than I like) that the 650 was more welcoming of the two, but still some people consider 600 being more neutral of the two.

 

[Rob80b]

Hi Guys… now that I’m 660s less (stuck with my 800Ss) I’m just lolling (trolling lol) along through here … … Like all things in this hobby there will always be Yeas and Nays but having spent over a decade with the 580/600s and three pairs of 650s there really is no way I could go back to any of them after the hearing the 660s.

The 600/650s might be common sights in the mastering room, not too sure about that (been a while but I was always an AKG man myself for monitoring and mastering) and maybe considered a reference point but the 660S, IMHO with the time I had spent with them.....are just, romanticizing aside.....a better/superior reproducer of sound overall, being more articulate, faster, clearer, better extended at both ends of the spectrum while retaining the classic 600 series mid-range.

 

[FullBright1]

HD600 is bit veiled?! You mean the bass is not enough in comparison or meaning veiled in the sense of the highs? .

The. HD600's mids, while sweet, are lacking just a bit of clarity. (veiled).
The 650s upped the overall clarity but overextended the low frequencies.
The HD660's take the HD700 Driver, and tweets it to perfection, paying close attention to not subtract the HD6 series "house sound",
So, they are not bright, they are clear because the mids are very very well designed.
No sibilance, no etched trebles nothing like that, but rather an exceptionally balanced presentation.

 

[FullBright1]

the 660S, IMHO with the time I had spent with them.....are just, romanticizing aside.....a better/superior reproducer of sound overall, being more articulate, faster, clearer, better extended at both ends of the spectrum while retaining the classic 600 series mid-range.

We have a winner.

 

[Mike F]

FullBright1, this isn't a response to anything you've said, but I wondered whether you've seen this:- https://sonarworks.com/blog/studio-headphone-review-sennheiser-hd660-s/

I've posted this before, so apologies to everyone who was around 50 or so pages ago . Please note, I am NOT saying that the HD 660 S is not a good headphone or that anyone's ears are deceiving them. If you like it, great! I'm just giving ONE example of a review which is less than !00% positive as you only seem to have come across Tyll's before (there are in fact a number of others as well). It's also a confirmation from a very well respected source that the HD 650 is well established as a tool (whether calibrated by them or not) in the music industry. Do read the article, but here is a copy and paste of the conclusion:-
Conclusion
If you’re looking for a revolution, then this sadly isn’t it. The HD660 S is an attempt to evolve the HD650 into something more exciting. The problem is that much of what made the HD650 great for sound editing has been therefore lost. It’s still a decent headphone for recreational listening, because of extra sparkle up top. However unlike 15 years ago, there are other decent headphones around the 500$ mark.

I would hope that no one here is going to take this as an attack on their new favourite headphone. It's not intended as such (and we've been through all that before ). I simply want to put FullBright1's extraordinary comments about the HD 650 not being suitable for use in pro audio into some context.

 

[iancraig10]

Well, I haven’t seen people using them to actually ‘mix’ music myself, but they are used extensively to monitor what the end user might hear. (Along with others)

Also, just because it’s used by ‘pros’ whatever you mean by that, doesn’t qualify it as a great headphone really. It’s just one of a number of ‘tools’ used, just as the Sony MDR7506 is used quite a lot or the DT770 which is used a lot by the BBC.

Doesn’t mean that they’re ‘great’ headphones, but used because of certain qualities that they have to monitor specific things.

I used a DT150 for years. Doesn’t mean that it’s a great headphone, because it’s not. However, it’s modular in design, is rolled away so plays loud without pain and indeed, has such thick wiring that it can also take plenty of power and literally be used as a pair of mini speakers.

I think ‘pros’ look at these things in a very different way to Hi-Fi people and it’s not always a great endorsement for any headphone.

 

[vaibhavp]

FullBright1, this isn't a response to anything you've said, but I wondered whether you've seen this:- https://sonarworks.com/blog/studio-headphone-review-sennheiser-hd660-s/

I've posted this before, so apologies to everyone who was around 50 or so pages ago . Please note, I am NOT saying that the HD 660 S is not a good headphone or that anyone's ears are deceiving them. If you like it, great! I'm just giving ONE example of a review which is less than !00% positive as you only seem to have come across Tyll's before (there are in fact a number of others as well). It's also a confirmation from a very well respected source that the HD 650 is well established as a tool (whether calibrated by them or not) in the music industry. Do read the article, but here is a copy and paste of the conclusion:-
Conclusion
If you’re looking for a revolution, then this sadly isn’t it. The HD660 S is an attempt to evolve the HD650 into something more exciting. The problem is that much of what made the HD650 great for sound editing has been therefore lost. It’s still a decent headphone for recreational listening, because of extra sparkle up top. However unlike 15 years ago, there are other decent headphones around the 500$ mark.

I would hope that no one here is going to take this as an attack on their new favourite headphone. It's not intended as such (and we've been through all that before ). I simply want to put FullBright1's extraordinary comments about the HD 650 not being suitable for use in pro audio into some context.

Mike, this para is included in the link you shared. This basically nullifies credibility of all beyer/akg hps for critical listening, mixing, mastering etc. You sure this review is credible?


"The graph shows that the HD660 S basically mirrors the older HD650 up until 6kHz and then starts doing its own thing. This really isn’t AKG or Beyerdynamic grade brightness, but for critical listening it’s a no go. Voice, string and other overtones will get unnatural emphasis. Sweeps will also be hard to get super precise."

 

[Mike F]

Well, I haven’t seen people using them to actually ‘mix’ music myself, but they are used extensively to monitor what the end user might hear. (Along with others)

Also, just because it’s used by ‘pros’ whatever you mean by that, doesn’t qualify it as a great headphone really. It’s just one of a number of ‘tools’ used, just as the Sony MDR7506 is used quite a lot or the DT770 which is used a lot by the BBC.

Doesn’t mean that they’re ‘great’ headphones, but used because of certain qualities that they have to monitor specific things.

I used a DT150 for years. Doesn’t mean that it’s a great headphone, because it’s not. However, it’s modular in design, is rolled away so plays loud without pain and indeed, has such thick wiring that it can also take plenty of power and literally be used as a pair of mini speakers.

I think ‘pros’ look at these things in a very different way to Hi-Fi people and it’s not always a great endorsement for any headphone.

I totally agree that just because the HD 650 is used by pros it doesn't mean that it's a great headphone. And yes, it's a tool and many such 'tools' do sound horrible. Sony MDR 7506 and DT770 being two examples. And you're right that such headphones are used because they have certain specific qualities and are useful for monitoring certain things - not because they sound good or are 'great' (whatever that means). I think that FullBright1 also mentioned the Yamaha NS10 near fields as an example of speakers that are used in the music industry that are not good, and he's right. They sound ghastly! But one of the reasons they became such a standard is that if a mix could be made to sound good on them then I would be guaranteed to sound great on anything else.

My only point here is in relation to my (intended as lighthearted) observation that Amazon.de refers to the HD 660 S and an 'audiophile' headphone and the HD 650 as a 'reference' headphone, and given the many comments here recently about the 660 S being an audiophile headphone that it might well be a good distinction between the two. That led to FullBright1's ill informed comment about the HD 650 not being suitable for mixing and mastering. Although mixes would of course always be checked on monitors, the HD 650 is, as I said before, one of the most highly regarded headphones for exactly that use. Just do a quick search on Gearslutz for example.

 

[Mike F]

Mike, this para is included in the link you shared. This basically nullifies credibility of all beyer/akg hps for critical listening, mixing, mastering etc. You sure this review is credible?


"The graph shows that the HD660 S basically mirrors the older HD650 up until 6kHz and then starts doing its own thing. This really isn’t AKG or Beyerdynamic grade brightness, but for critical listening it’s a no go. Voice, string and other overtones will get unnatural emphasis. Sweeps will also be hard to get super precise."

vaibhavp, see my response to iancraig10 above. Also, it's true that many (but not all) AKG and Beyers are very bright. I don't think that the review is saying that all AKG's and Beyer's (and there are a lot of them!) are not suitable for mixing/mastering, (and in any case the most relevant thing when a headphone is used for those duties is how well the user knows their sound and can mix accordingly) but that the HD 660 S is not as bright as some. They clearly think though that the HD 650 is better suited to mixing/mastering. It's also just their opinion, I know, but it's just one example that shows that dismissing the HD 650 for that use is, as I said, ill informed.

 

[vaibhavp]

vaibhavp, see my response to iancraig10 above. Also, it's true that many (but not all) AKG and Beyers are very bright. I don't think that the review is saying that all AKG's and Beyer's (and there are a lot of them!) are not suitable for mixing/mastering, (and in any case the most relevant thing when a headphone is used for those duties is how well the user knows their sound and can mix accordingly) but that the HD 660 S is not as bright as some. They clearly think though that the HD 650 is better suited to mixing/mastering. It's also just their opinion, I know, but it's just one example that shows that dismissing the HD 650 for that use is, as I said, ill informed.

Its funny how desperately you are clinging to criticism of hd660s

For me personally, that review is contradictory and would not be considered. Akg and beyer are pro targeted companies. Whenever i see recording studio images I see akg, beyer, shure, at m50 etc.

 

[pietcux]

Its funny how desperately you are clinging to criticism of hd660s

For me personally, that review is contradictory and would not be considered. Akg and beyer are pro targeted companies. Whenever i see recording studio images I see akg, beyer, shure, at m50 etc.

Most PROs are already stating to go deaf. They need their treble peaks.

 

[vaibhavp]

Most PROs are already stating to go deaf. They need their treble peaks.

Makes sense. Since sometimes musicians use hps in noisy environment, like in live show, they need to make out starting and stopping of notes as precisely as possible. Hence the bright and etched treble.

They are getting deaf cause they use hps on high volumes to drown out noise of the show.

 

[Mike F]

Its funny how desperately you are clinging to criticism of hd660s

For me personally, that review is contradictory and would not be considered. Akg and beyer are pro targeted companies. Whenever i see recording studio images I see akg, beyer, shure, at m50 etc.

I really don't know why you have that idea. No, I don't own the HD 660 S yet, but I certainly will pick up a pair when the prices drop, and no doubt I will enjoy them. Why is it not possible to have a mature discussion about them in relation to the HD 650 without people feeling that I'm being critical of either them or the HD 660 S?

Yes, AKG and Beyer are basically pro companies, and two of the best in the industry. You will see lots of them in studios, but where it's possible to use an open back headphone for checking mixes etc the HD 650 is highly regarded.

I'm out for today. Have to go and do something productive!

 

[Mike F]

Most PROs are already stating to go deaf. They need their treble peaks.

PARDON?