Sennheiser HD820
post-14451371
Post #2,191 of 3,061

AppleheadMay

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 12, 2009
Messages
5,041
Reaction score
492
Location
Planet Earth. Usually.
Joined
Jul 12, 2009
Location
Planet Earth. Usually.
Posts
5,041
Likes
492
Actually, it really can make a difference. One of my primary considerations when buying eyeglasses is choosing a set with temples (the arms) that are as low-profile as possible, to eliminate or minimize the impact on the headphone seal.

The glasses I'm wearing now (one of the temples of which is pictured below) has no impact that I can on the bass with the HD820 -- it sounds exactly the same to me with or without these on. The temples (the arms) are very thin and are quite snug with my head. The curved portion is covered with a very thin rubber piece, and the back part of the curve was also shaped to fit perfectly against the area behind each ear.

Given that the HD820 is a closed-back headphone, how well it seals (or doesn't seal) against the wearer's head will have a greater impact than with its open-back counterparts.
I can't say I choose my glasses with regards to headphone use but I have similar needs because I ride motorbikes and need to wear my glasses under a helmet.
If the arms aren't superthin it can be quite painful behind the ears and difficult to slide them into the helmet as you have to put on the helmet first.
That's why I use these glasses:
https://lindberg.com/en/showroom/men/horn
Very thin and quite flexible metal yet strong arms.
 
     Share This Post       
post-14451397
Post #2,192 of 3,061

up late

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Feb 19, 2013
Messages
5,977
Reaction score
1,641
Joined
Feb 19, 2013
Posts
5,977
Likes
1,641
looking forward to seeing @jude's hd820 measurements
 
     Share This Post       
post-14451407
Post #2,193 of 3,061
Joined
Jun 20, 2001
Messages
10,870
Reaction score
4,452
I can't say I choose my glasses with regards to headphone use but I have similar needs because I ride motorbikes and need to wear my glasses under a helmet.
If the arms aren't superthin it can be quite painful behind the ears and difficult to slide them into the helmet as you have to put on the helmet first.
That's why I use these glasses:
https://lindberg.com/en/showroom/men/horn
Very thin and quite flexible metal yet strong arms.
Yes, that's the same maker of my eyeglasses in the photo (in my previous post).
 

Attachments

     Share This Post       
post-14451411
Post #2,194 of 3,061

AppleheadMay

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 12, 2009
Messages
5,041
Reaction score
492
Location
Planet Earth. Usually.
Joined
Jul 12, 2009
Location
Planet Earth. Usually.
Posts
5,041
Likes
492
Yes, that's the same maker of my eyeglasses in the photo (in my previous post).
Heh, I didn't notice that and didn't pay attention to it in your videos as well.
Maybe because I'm so used to mine having round glasses.
In any case, they're a very good brand for both motorcycling and headphone use.
 
     Share This Post       
post-14451490
Post #2,195 of 3,061
Joined
Jun 20, 2001
Messages
10,870
Reaction score
4,452
looking forward to seeing @jude's hd820 measurements
Here is the frequency response measurement of the Sennheiser HD820 versus its open-back siblings (Fig.1):

Sennheiser-HD-820_HD-800_and-HD-800S---FR.jpg

Fig.1 Sennheiser HD820 frequency response, compared to the Sennheiser HD800 and HD800S

As you can see, this is quite different than the measurement posted earlier in the thread by someone else. I suspect that the previously posted measurement did not model a proper acoustical load with an ear simulator/coupler -- an apparatus that connects the DUT (device under test) to a microphone in such a way that the working load on the DUT is the same as if used on a real ear [1]. Modeling the input impedance of the human ear becomes increasingly important the higher the acoustic output impedance of the DUT [1]. Also, the need for modeling the correct impedance increases with the proximity of the DUT to the ear [2]. It is for these reasons we use ear simulators for measuring headphones.

I should also note that we are currently using a new GRAS High Resolution Ear Simulator (GRAS RA0401), released in 2017, with key improvements versus a standard IEC 60318-4 ear simulator. The standard IEC 60318-4 (former IEC 60711) ear simulator was designed in the early 1980's and mimics the input and transfer impedance of a human ear. While the input impedance was based on measurements on human subjects, the transfer impedance was based on the assumption that the ear canal is a simple cylindrical volume with a hard termination. The new GRAS High Resolution Ear Simulator still complies with the IEC 60318-4 tolerance band (which is specified up to 10 kHz), but with significantly improved performance above 10 kHz. From 10 kHz to 20 kHz the transfer impedance is within +/- 2.2 dB, resulting in much improved repeatability and more realistic THD measurements [3].

We are also using a new, more human-like anthropometric measurement pinna by GRAS. The new pinna is based on 300+ 3D scans of human ear canals, designed to be closer to the human ear, with important changes to the pinna, concha and ear canal (versus previous measurement pinnae). You can see a short video about this here: GRAS Anthropometric Pinna

You can find out more about the measurement lab at Head-Fi HQ at the following link: Head-Fi Audio Measurement Lab

While the HD820 frequency response measurement is quite different versus the comparatively more linear frequency responses of its open-back siblings (HD800 and HD800S), a comparison with another premium closed-back headphone (like the Sony MDR-Z1R) might be a more relevant apples-to-apples comparison, and shows the HD820 in a different light (Fig.2):

Sennheiser-HD-820-and-Sony-MDR-Z1R---FR.jpg

Fig.2 Sennheiser HD820 frequency response, compared to the Sony MDR-Z1R

The steep drop that starts <200 Hz is there by design. If you want to better understand why it's there, make sure to watch this presentation by Axel Grell of Sennheiser from CanJam NYC 2018 (for discussion of this specifically, start watching at around the 27:00 mark):


Simply put, there was significant consideration given to an internally developed preference curve and psychoacoustics in voicing the HD820 (and Axel Grell does discuss other preference curves when asked about them in the talk above). If you haven't already done so, I strongly suggest you watch the entire presentation.

Given that it's a closed-back headphone, the HD820 will be more sensitive to breaks in the seal than its open-back siblings, but that's to be expected. As I said in an earlier post, I get a good seal with the HD820, even with my eyeglasses on.

As I also said earlier, I definitely prefer the HD820's tonal balance to the HD800S (and, for further reference, I strongly prefer the HD800S to the HD800). That said -- and this shouldn't be at all surprising -- the HD800S is, to my ears, ultimately more resolving. Again, the HD800S is open-back, free-breathing, unencumbered by some of the issues of acoustics/physics that must be dealt with for this class of closed-back headphone with the HD820. What resolution the HD820 does sacrifice to its sibling, though, is worth the gains in the tonal balance for me. Still, the HD820 is without a doubt one of the most resolving closed-back headphones currently available, and also among the widest imaging of them.

By the way, here are the THD measurements, first versus its HD800 and HD800S siblings (Fig.3), and then versus the Sony MDR-Z1R (Fig.4):

Sennheiser-HD-820_HD-800_and-HD-800S---THD.jpg

Fig.3 Sennheiser HD820 total harmonic distortion (THD), compared to the Sennheiser HD800 and HD800S

Sennheiser-HD-820-and-Sony-MDR-Z1R---THD.jpg
Fig.4 Sennheiser HD820 total harmonic distortion (THD), compared to the Sony MDR-Z1R

The measurements included in this post were made on the same day using:


[1] Brüel, P. V., Frederiksen, E., Mathiasen, H., Rasmussen, G., and Sigh, E. (1976). "Investigations of a new insert earphone coupler," Part I in "Impedance of Real and Artificial Ears," Brüel and Kjær report.

[2] Brüel & Kjær, "Measuring Human Audio Perception," presented at the 2018 ALMA International Symposium & Expo (AISE).

[3] Wille, M. (2017). "High Resolution Ear Simulator," GRAS Sound & Vibration white paper.
 
Last edited:
post-14451522
Post #2,196 of 3,061

GREQ

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Oct 11, 2009
Messages
5,197
Reaction score
2,117
Location
Frankfurt am Main
Joined
Oct 11, 2009
Location
Frankfurt am Main
Posts
5,197
Likes
2,117
Website
app.gitbook.com
Having auditioned the HD820 only 2 days ago for the first time, I have to say that my impression of the sound doesn't match the posted graphs.
Graphs show a bassier headphone compared to HD800/800S, but my ears thought it to be inversely true.
To my ears, HD820 was very mid-centric, and very dry sounding.

There seems to be some talk going around of extremely varying impressions on the perceived frequency response, which is due to individual head shape and wearing position.
I might have to re-audition and wear it in weird places.
 
     Share This Post       
  • Like
Reactions: halcyon and RCBinTN
post-14451606
Post #2,197 of 3,061

crinacle

Member of the Trade: In-Ear Fidelity
Joined
Feb 3, 2011
Messages
2,346
Reaction score
2,906
Location
Singapore
Joined
Feb 3, 2011
Location
Singapore
Posts
2,346
Likes
2,906
Website
crinacle.com
The graph looks very representative to me. I found it rather weird during my initial listening session as it was somehow simultaneously thick sounding and thin sounding at the same time. Bass was rather bloaty and slow and yet the vocals felt as if the singers were constantly using head voice. The enhanced bass and suppressed lower midrange seems to explain what I was hearing just fine.
 
     Share This Post       
  • Like
Reactions: RCBinTN
post-14451627
Post #2,198 of 3,061

Virtu Fortuna

Reviewer: Headfonia
Joined
Jan 12, 2014
Messages
711
Reaction score
500
Joined
Jan 12, 2014
Posts
711
Likes
500
The graph looks very representative to me. I found it rather weird during my initial listening session as it was somehow simultaneously thick sounding and thin sounding at the same time. Bass was rather bloaty and slow and yet the vocals felt as if the singers were constantly using head voice. The enhanced bass and suppressed lower midrange seems to explain what I was hearing just fine.
There's a significant drop on lower mid range on the graph indeed.
 
     Share This Post       
post-14451632
Post #2,199 of 3,061

Whitigir

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Oct 14, 2013
Messages
19,319
Reaction score
14,226
Joined
Oct 14, 2013
Posts
19,319
Likes
14,226
I don’t know, but looking through that graph, I automatically think of what a great job Z1R had done
 
post-14451728
Post #2,200 of 3,061

up late

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Feb 19, 2013
Messages
5,977
Reaction score
1,641
Joined
Feb 19, 2013
Posts
5,977
Likes
1,641
There's a significant drop on lower mid range on the graph indeed.
it's apparent in the other set of measurements as well, tho it looks more extreme there. it's an uneven fr no matter how you slice it.
 
Last edited:
     Share This Post       
post-14451740
Post #2,201 of 3,061

QueueCumber

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jan 9, 2018
Messages
353
Reaction score
409
Location
NY
Joined
Jan 9, 2018
Location
NY
Posts
353
Likes
409
Here is the frequency response measurement of the Sennheiser HD820 versus its open-back siblings (Fig.1):


Fig.1 Sennheiser HD820 frequency response, compared to the Sennheiser HD800 and HD800S

As you can see, this is quite different than the measurement posted earlier in the thread by someone else. I suspect that the previously posted measurement did not model a proper acoustical load with an ear simulator/coupler -- an apparatus that connects the DUT (device under test) to a microphone in such a way that the working load on the DUT is the same as if used on a real ear [1]. Modeling the input impedance of the human ear becomes increasingly important the higher the acoustic output impedance of the DUT [1]. Also, the need for modeling the correct impedance increases with the proximity of the DUT to the ear [2], which is why we use ear simulators for measuring headphones.

I should also note that we are currently using a newer GRAS High Resolution Ear Simulator (GRAS RA0401). The standard IEC 60318-4 (former IEC 60711) ear simulator was designed in the early 1980's and mimics the input and transfer impedance of a human ear. While the input impedance was based on measurements on human subjects, the transfer impedance was based on the assumption that the ear canal is a simple cylindrical volume with a hard termination. While the GRAS High Resolution Ear Simulator still complies with IEC 60318-4 tolerance band (which is specified up to 10 kHz), it has improved performance above 10 kHz. From 10 Hz to 20 kHz the transfer impedance is within +/- 2.2 dB, resulting in much improved repeatability and more realistic THD measurements [3].

You can find out more about the measurement lab at Head-Fi HQ at the following link: Head-Fi Audio Measurement Lab

While the HD820 measurement may look rather unusual versus the comparatively very linear frequency responses of its open-back siblings (HD800 and HD800S), a comparison with another premium closed-back headphone (the Sony MDR-Z1R) shows it in a different light (Fig.2):


Fig.2 Sennheiser HD820 frequency response, compared to the Sony MDR-Z1R

The steep drop that starts <200 Hz is there by design. If you want to better understand why it's there, make sure to watch this presentation by Axel Grell of Sennheiser from CanJam NYC 2018 (for discussion of this specifically, start watching at around the 27:00 mark):


Simply put, there was significant consideration given to an internally developed preference curve and psychoacoustics in voicing the HD820 (and Axel Grell does discuss other preference curves when asked about them in the talk above). If you haven't already done so, I strongly suggest you watch the entire presentation.

Given that it's a closed-back headphone, the HD820 will be more sensitive to breaks in the seal than its open-back siblings, but that's to be expected. As I said in an earlier post, I get a good seal with the HD820, even with my eyeglasses on.

As I also said earlier, I definitely prefer the HD820's tonal balance to the HD800S (and, for further reference, I strongly prefer the HD800S to the HD800). That said -- and this shouldn't be at all surprising -- the HD800S is, to my ears, ultimately more resolving. Again, the HD800S is open-back, free-breathing, unencumbered by some of the issues of acoustics/physics that must be dealt with for this class of closed-back headphone with the HD820. What resolution the HD820 does sacrifice to its sibling, though, is worth the gains in the tonal balance for me. Still, the HD820 is without a doubt one of the most resolving closed-back headphones currently available, and also among the widest imaging of them.

By the way, here are the THD measurements, first versus its HD800 and HD800S siblings (Fig.3), and then versus the Sony MDR-Z1R (Fig.4):


Fig.3 Sennheiser HD820 total harmonic distortion (THD), compared to the Sennheiser HD800 and HD800S

Fig.4 Sennheiser HD820 total harmonic distortion (THD), compared to the Sony MDR-Z1R

The measurements included in this post were made on the same day using:


[1] Brüel, P. V., Frederiksen, E., Mathiasen, H., Rasmussen, G., and Sigh, E. (1976). "Investigations of a new insert earphone coupler," Part I in "Impedance of Real and Artificial Ears," Brüel and Kjær report.

[2] Brüel & Kjær, "Measuring Human Audio Perception," presented at the 2018 ALMA International Symposium & Expo (AISE).

[3] Wille, M. (2017). "High Resolution Ear Simulator," GRAS Sound & Vibration white paper.
How does the 820 compare with the Z1R for you, if you don’t mind making the comparison?
 
     Share This Post       
post-14451759
Post #2,202 of 3,061

GREQ

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Oct 11, 2009
Messages
5,197
Reaction score
2,117
Location
Frankfurt am Main
Joined
Oct 11, 2009
Location
Frankfurt am Main
Posts
5,197
Likes
2,117
Website
app.gitbook.com
it's apparent in the other set of measurements as well, tho it looks more extreme there. it's an uneven fr no matter how you slice it.
It's nothing new though, and certainly not a bad thing.
This kind of dip between 200-300Hz can be found in other well loved headphones like DT770 and HA-DX1000.
Usually I find this kind of response curve to be very pleasing, as it has the effect of reducing the thickness in the bass and still produces a textured low-bass response with impact.
 
     Share This Post       
  • Like
Reactions: trellus and RCBinTN
post-14451770
Post #2,203 of 3,061

Rchandra

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 15, 2015
Messages
483
Reaction score
147
Joined
Jun 15, 2015
Posts
483
Likes
147
Here is the frequency response measurement of the Sennheiser HD820 versus its open-back siblings (Fig.1):


Fig.1 Sennheiser HD820 frequency response, compared to the Sennheiser HD800 and HD800S

As you can see, this is quite different than the measurement posted earlier in the thread by someone else. I suspect that the previously posted measurement did not model a proper acoustical load with an ear simulator/coupler -- an apparatus that connects the DUT (device under test) to a microphone in such a way that the working load on the DUT is the same as if used on a real ear [1]. Modeling the input impedance of the human ear becomes increasingly important the higher the acoustic output impedance of the DUT [1]. Also, the need for modeling the correct impedance increases with the proximity of the DUT to the ear [2], which is why we use ear simulators for measuring headphones.

I should also note that we are currently using a newer GRAS High Resolution Ear Simulator (GRAS RA0401). The standard IEC 60318-4 (former IEC 60711) ear simulator was designed in the early 1980's and mimics the input and transfer impedance of a human ear. While the input impedance was based on measurements on human subjects, the transfer impedance was based on the assumption that the ear canal is a simple cylindrical volume with a hard termination. While the GRAS High Resolution Ear Simulator still complies with IEC 60318-4 tolerance band (which is specified up to 10 kHz), it has improved performance above 10 kHz. From 10 Hz to 20 kHz the transfer impedance is within +/- 2.2 dB, resulting in much improved repeatability and more realistic THD measurements [3].

You can find out more about the measurement lab at Head-Fi HQ at the following link: Head-Fi Audio Measurement Lab

While the HD820 measurement may look rather unusual versus the comparatively very linear frequency responses of its open-back siblings (HD800 and HD800S), a comparison with another premium closed-back headphone (the Sony MDR-Z1R) shows it in a different light (Fig.2):


Fig.2 Sennheiser HD820 frequency response, compared to the Sony MDR-Z1R

The steep drop that starts <200 Hz is there by design. If you want to better understand why it's there, make sure to watch this presentation by Axel Grell of Sennheiser from CanJam NYC 2018 (for discussion of this specifically, start watching at around the 27:00 mark):


Simply put, there was significant consideration given to an internally developed preference curve and psychoacoustics in voicing the HD820 (and Axel Grell does discuss other preference curves when asked about them in the talk above). If you haven't already done so, I strongly suggest you watch the entire presentation.

Given that it's a closed-back headphone, the HD820 will be more sensitive to breaks in the seal than its open-back siblings, but that's to be expected. As I said in an earlier post, I get a good seal with the HD820, even with my eyeglasses on.

As I also said earlier, I definitely prefer the HD820's tonal balance to the HD800S (and, for further reference, I strongly prefer the HD800S to the HD800). That said -- and this shouldn't be at all surprising -- the HD800S is, to my ears, ultimately more resolving. Again, the HD800S is open-back, free-breathing, unencumbered by some of the issues of acoustics/physics that must be dealt with for this class of closed-back headphone with the HD820. What resolution the HD820 does sacrifice to its sibling, though, is worth the gains in the tonal balance for me. Still, the HD820 is without a doubt one of the most resolving closed-back headphones currently available, and also among the widest imaging of them.

By the way, here are the THD measurements, first versus its HD800 and HD800S siblings (Fig.3), and then versus the Sony MDR-Z1R (Fig.4):


Fig.3 Sennheiser HD820 total harmonic distortion (THD), compared to the Sennheiser HD800 and HD800S

Fig.4 Sennheiser HD820 total harmonic distortion (THD), compared to the Sony MDR-Z1R

The measurements included in this post were made on the same day using:


[1] Brüel, P. V., Frederiksen, E., Mathiasen, H., Rasmussen, G., and Sigh, E. (1976). "Investigations of a new insert earphone coupler," Part I in "Impedance of Real and Artificial Ears," Brüel and Kjær report.

[2] Brüel & Kjær, "Measuring Human Audio Perception," presented at the 2018 ALMA International Symposium & Expo (AISE).

[3] Wille, M. (2017). "High Resolution Ear Simulator," GRAS Sound & Vibration white paper.
Judge when you say resolving what do you mean over tonal balance is one more "clearer" sounding while one is more has more harmony to the music
 
     Share This Post       
post-14451791
Post #2,204 of 3,061

up late

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Feb 19, 2013
Messages
5,977
Reaction score
1,641
Joined
Feb 19, 2013
Posts
5,977
Likes
1,641
It's nothing new though, and certainly not a bad thing.
This kind of dip between 200-300Hz can be found in other well loved headphones like DT770 and HA-DX1000.
Usually I find this kind of response curve to be very pleasing, as it has the effect of reducing the thickness in the bass and still produces a textured low-bass response with impact.
sure and i look forward to hearing the hd820 for myself
 
     Share This Post       
post-14451830
Post #2,205 of 3,061

Audiotic

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Nov 2, 2014
Messages
113
Reaction score
47
Joined
Nov 2, 2014
Posts
113
Likes
47
1FA5B04C-DBDB-4550-99DA-157D32488E0F.jpeg
4F4FA0FC-C780-4AD7-9E8D-89A16A7676DE.jpeg
867C1EF9-479E-4AF6-90A0-25A7C6616A07.jpeg
Beagle I just want to mention that personally I'm not experiencing any problems at all with getting my HD 820 to sit right on my head. I've noticed as well though that by simply opening my mouth the bass completely changes until I close it again so I understand your frustration.
First experience with the Dekoni Hybrids on the HD820: very comfortable, more than the original ones. Plus the headphones sit better on my head. The positioning issue is gone! They always immediately sit well now.
They are a bit thicker, which may be part of the reason they always sit snug.
Installation was under 1 minute...
Sound is no real difference with the originals.
So, they can stay, because overall it’s an improvement.
 
Last edited:

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top