[MacedonianHero]

  HD800s warmer than HD800, HD800 brighter than HD800s, whichever phrase you pick, I think both are true. My HD800 sounds more open and is a bit easier to hear the detail than on my HD800S, but listen closely and you'll hear that it's all there. In this sense my impressions mesh very well with shabta here in that if you're a HD800 lover, you really need to audition both before you choose. I see that there was a recent audiophile meet in San Francisco where they tested a new HD800 mod that seems promising. All in all I wouldn't count out the HD800 just yet.

 
My comments were more to say that the HD800's are a bit too far on the "bright" side of things to be neutral/natural; the HD800S is never "warm", but spot on to my ears; thus my preference for the latter comment I made. I certainly don't count out the HD800's either, they're great headphones. But in the end, they became a bit of a pariah for me as I avoided them with many "brighter" recordings...the HD800S's have fixed this for me...and for me, that's a big step in the right direction...add the slightly more bass down low and I personally can't go back. YMMV of course.

 

[Mentis]

So it's a subtle difference yet a huge improvement

 

[MacedonianHero]

So it's a subtle difference yet a huge improvement

 
I think the best way to describe it (for me anyway) is that I always loved the HD800's, but their treble issues (and their lower end to a lesser extent) held them back from true greatness (again for me). Now with the HD800S's, they are definitely in my top 3-4 headphones of all time. And the differences are not "subtle", but not huge either.

 

[Nicklikesmusic]

My modded HD800 (foam+ rug liner) clearly has a higher peak in the 6k region than my HD800S. But probably because of the damping, the former also sounds smoother in the treble, so pick your poison.

I saw a few charts around here, and my HD800S actually has a higher 6k region (on mine it's level with the 8k region). As a fan of the modded HD800 as well, this sounds pretty good to me. Not warm and never piercing, but still retaining the excitement of the original.

Can you please post your HD800S chart

? 

 

[Christer]

Thanks for more classical music examples with both models.
I too like Kubelik's old DGG Mahler on LP musically, but SQ wise they are only good not stunning by today's standards imo.Dynamic range is really  limited compared to more modern digital ones.
For more modern state of the art DSD 64 SQ  of the wonderful 9th,I would recommend Channel Classics BFO Fischer from Budapest.
It is not only a good run interpretatively to Kubelik's 60's recording, but also a good example of how an orchestra sounds in a real hall.
Ok there are a few  spot mics involved, but the general sound is very realistic indeed. I was present at a week of sessions in this ongoing Mahler series and did the photography for Mahler's fifth there a few years back. And I can vouch for that Jared comes very close to  the live sound in the hall.
I am actually going to rehearsals and concerts of Mahler's 9th in a few weeks in Kuala Lumpur  with the MPO,another good orchestra and hall where BIS has made some good recordings in the past.
BIS now records  the SSO in Singapore and their Rachmaninov series is basically SOTA pcm 24/96.
Very realistic piano SQ in the concerts.
For more really good recording quality of classical I would also recommend Challenge Classics label and of course Reference Recordings both the Keith Johnson pcm 24/176.4 and their newer DXD or DSD 256 recordings from Pittsburgh are demonstration quality recordings  not to be missed by anyone who wants to hear what their HI FI is really capable of imo.
If not before, I will get a chance to compare both the Sennheiser's to the HEK at Canjam in February in Singapore using only acoustic  music material of reference SQ.
By the way, I am actually turning 67 in 6 months. But the  treble spike of my otherwise beloved HD 800 is sometimes a bit disturbing especially on  loud massed strings.
That was one of the things it seems HEK does  slightly better than my HD 800 during the short 2-3 hours comparison I have made so far between the two.
I have yet to audition the new HD 800s.
PS No offence intended, just some recommendations above.

 

[jelt2359]

 
Can you please post your HD800S chart

? 

 
Here you go. I was referring to the practically-level 6k to 9k region.
 

 

[vnmslsrbms]

   
Here you go. I was referring to the practically-level 6k to 9k region.

So they dipped the 5k and raised the 8k for the 800S.  Looks so similar though.  

 

[jelt2359]

  So they dipped the 5k and raised the 8k for the 800S.  Looks so similar though.  

This is my HD800 chart.
 

 

[james444]

 

Hi James Nice to have someone read my post at least Your graphs pretty much match mine if you factor in the ears natural frequency response. This one shows Hearing Threshold rather than Hearing Loss as in my graph.

 
Hi Nick, hearing loss is determined by testing the hearing threshold, so the message is basically the same. The only thing that really matters imo, are the differences between the baseline (i.e. 20 year old) and the curves for older people, which all become larger as you move up in the frequency domain. The ears natural frequency response per se is pretty much irrelevant in that regard.
 

  http://www.psych.usyd.edu.au/staff/alexh/teaching/auditoryTute_2014/
 
Hi James
 
Heres the source, not using this as a means to justify my answer. Just to continue the conversation. Apparently its for natural age related hearing loss and is an interesting read. I'm always keen to learn new things and my wife isn't really interested in my ramblings 

 
Don't know what you Aussies are teaching your youngsters...

  But whenever in doubt, consult the International Organization for Standardization (aka ISO):
 

 
Quote:

The ISO standard 7029 shows expected threshold changes due purely to age for carefully screened populations (i.e. excluding those with ear disease, noise exposure etc.), based on a meta-analysis of published data.^[2][3] Age affects high frequencies more than low, and men more than women. One early consequence is that even young adults may lose the ability to hear very high frequency tones above 15 or 16 kHz. Despite this, age-related hearing loss may only become noticeable later in life. The effects of age can be exacerbated by exposure to environmental noise, whether at work or in leisure time (shooting, music, etc.). This is noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) and is distinct from presbycusis

 
 
 

 
James444 & Nicklikesmusic
 
I wonder about the relevance of many of these tests in relation to the normal music listening experience at appropriate SPL levels. That is, in contrast to minimum SPL recognition. Being in my 70's and having tinnitus, testing lower SPL recognition is irrelevant to what I hear listening at real/comfortable/concert-hall levels.
 
As you can try for yourself, I have done my own headphone listening tests at my normal (loudish) listening levels, using Warble Tones and Sine Waves, comparing each frequency's perceived loudness levels to a base frequency (either 200Hz or 500Hz). At these SPL levels, there was no perceived fall off in loudness levels at all up to about 8kHz (after which it dropped like a stone). This confirms what I was hearing clearly when attending live acoustic events/orchestras. However, if I did that test at lowest SPL levels, I would be told I badly need a hearing aid, because my hearing 1kHz > 8kHz was severely compromised (particularly with test tones disappearing into my built-in background noise levels).
 
This erroneous conclusion about my hearing at normal to loud levels is why I will never adjust/compromise my brains acceptance of what is natural and realistic by using a hearing aid. It also cuts across the believe that older people cannot hear or be highly sensitive to high frequency aberrations or distortions, whether it be from a HD800 or other headphone.
 
Cheers
Frank

 
Hi Frank, that's an interesting aspect, and from subjective experience, I tend to agree with your observation. I don't think I've ever come across published research in that regard though.

 

[vnmslsrbms]

  This is my HD800 chart.
 

Yeah that's the one I was comparing the HD800S to.  Found it in the images.  It's a little misleading since the range is much too large.  They want to show a really flat response but it's +5db at some points from 0.  I don't find the HD800 so piercing on a lot of songs like others, so it's not really a problem for me.  Occasionally it pops up and annoys me, but that's not the norm.  Looks like the helmholtz resonator only took care of very small 1db changes at certain frequencies.  
 
Edit: by it's misleading I mean how Senn presents their charts, not how you presented it clearly.  Say most of Tyll's measurements show much more movement due to the range chosen.  

 

[xp9433]

  Hi Frank, that's an interesting aspect, and from subjective experience, I tend to agree with your observation. I don't think I've ever come across published research in that regard though.

 
James444
 
I went to two audiologists looking for solutions to hearing conversation better at lower SPL's or in noisy environments. Their only answer was for a hearing aid that radically boosted high frequencies (based on low SPL tone testing criteria - including tinnitus). When I said I could hear conversation very clearly at reasonable volume and the orchestra sounded just the same today as it did 50 years ago (although I prefer row 4 or 5 now) - seemingly no loss of response to cymbals, triangles, or violins. (In fact I am quite senstive to high frquency distortions)
 
When the audiologists were asked how a boost to high frequencies would affect my hearing the response was roughly, "You will adjust to the initial tinny sound, and your brain will accept it as the norm eventually!" So when asked, "Once my brain adjusts, does that mean when listening to an orchestra without hearing aids, it would sound dull?" and the response, was "Never thought of that before, but it could do." The audiologist had no way of testing my hearing at normal listening levels, whether it be for conversation or music, and had quite frankly never considered it!
 
Needless to say, I never went back to either. Listening to music is too important to me. So my belief is that for people like me, a hearing aid that boosts volume with no EQ might be a solution for conversation, but never for music, and I am not paying $10K for that privelege.

 

[jelt2359]

Yeah that's the one I was comparing the HD800S to.  Found it in the images.  It's a little misleading since the range is much too large.  They want to show a really flat response but it's +5db at some points from 0.  I don't find the HD800 so piercing on a lot of songs like others, so it's not really a problem for me.  Occasionally it pops up and annoys me, but that's not the norm.  Looks like the helmholtz resonator only took care of very small 1db changes at certain frequencies.  

Edit: by it's misleading I mean how Senn presents their charts, not how you presented it clearly.  Say most of Tyll's measurements show much more movement due to the range chosen.  

Of course. I think these charts only have value comparing one Senn to another (eg. variation from set to set). They mean nothing on an absolute basis- for eg if you're trying to understand their freq response.

 

[shabta]

   
My comments were more to say that the HD800's are a bit too far on the "bright" side of things to be neutral/natural; the HD800S is never "warm", but spot on to my ears; thus my preference for the latter comment I made. 

The S is definitely still on the bright side. It is warmer than the HD800. It certainly isn't a HD650. @MacedonianHero, how are you finding the S with different amps? My limited experience says it is less amp sensitive than the HD800. I realize you don't have an HD800 on hand to compare, but have you tried a few different amps?

 

[shabta]

  shabta,
 
My hat is off to you, good sir! Excellent review. Like some other reviews I have read, it really makes me want to listen to the music you used to evaluate these 'phones. 
 
Additionally, I recently started listening to some classical music myself, and think it would be cool to hear those sweet violins you love. Would you mind posting the CDs you used in this section of your review?

I happy you find the mini-review helpful.
 
I listened to a lot of stuff that I didn't mention in the review. But I picked certain recordings to illustrate some general themes that illustrate what I was hearing. In the review you quoted,  I mention the exact pieces I used. If you are having trouble locating them, pm me and I will point you in the right direction. I am thinking of cobbling together a proper review so that everything is one place. Then I will list more extensively recordings I used. 

 

[shabta]

  Thanks for more classical music examples with both models.
I too like Kubelik's old DGG Mahler on LP musically, but SQ wise they are only good not stunning by today's standards imo.Dynamic range is really  limited compared to more modern digital ones.
For more modern state of the art DSD 64 SQ  of the wonderful 9th,I would recommend Channel Classics BFO Fischer from Budapest.
It is not only a good run interpretatively to Kubelik's 60's recording, but also a good example of how an orchestra sounds in a real hall.
Ok there are a few  spot mics involved, but the general sound is very realistic indeed. I was present at a week of sessions in this ongoing Mahler series and did the photography for Mahler's fifth there a few years back. And I can vouch for that Jared comes very close to  the live sound in the hall.
I am actually going to rehearsals and concerts of Mahler's 9th in a few weeks in Kuala Lumpur  with the MPO,another good orchestra and hall where BIS has made some good recordings in the past.
BIS now records  the SSO in Singapore and their Rachmaninov series is basically SOTA pcm 24/96.
Very realistic piano SQ in the concerts.
For more really good recording quality of classical I would also recommend Challenge Classics label and of course Reference Recordings both the Keith Johnson pcm 24/176.4 and their newer DXD or DSD 256 recordings from Pittsburgh are demonstration quality recordings  not to be missed by anyone who wants to hear what their HI FI is really capable of imo.
If not before, I will get a chance to compare both the Sennheiser's to the HEK at Canjam in February in Singapore using only acoustic  music material of reference SQ.
By the way, I am actually turning 67 in 6 months. But the  treble spike of my otherwise beloved HD 800 is sometimes a bit disturbing especially on  loud massed strings.
That was one of the things it seems HEK does  slightly better than my HD 800 during the short 2-3 hours comparison I have made so far between the two.
I have yet to audition the new HD 800s.
PS No offence intended, just some recommendations above.

Thanks for the recs! I'll definitely lookout for those RR recordings. I forgot that I had the Ivan Fischer and thanks to you I listened to it again this morning. I think I agree with what you say about it. I picked the Kubelik, because I have heard it a hundred times and I felt like making it 101 .   I also agree with what you said about the HEK. But I found that the seeming loss of detail wasn't worth it, in addition, I sometimes listen for several hours at a time and would need to visit an osteopath regularly to survive the weight of the thing.