[bigshot]

Most of the people hearing a veil seem to be listeners to popular music, rather than classical. Some people who hear the veil say they hear none with classical music. I have a theory that may or may not be the cause...

With all of the multi-speaker setups, digital reverbs and surround sound schemes, I bet engineers are slipping more and more out of phase material into their mixes. (Out of phase material is usually channeled to rear speakers.) Could it be that the Sennheisers are depicting phase more accurately than other brands? If they are, perhaps the out of phase material is cancelling out some of the in phase material. (If out of phase material comes in contact with in phase, it can cancel out the sound in the middle range, dropping the volume level considerably.) If the phase reproduction is a little more sloppy, this phase cancellation might not happen as badly.

Classical music is *always* mixed in phase, because engineers are trying to create a naturally realistic soundstage, eschewing digital effects like that.

I don't know enough about how rear channel programs are mastered to know for sure, but it's a theory...

See ya
Steve

 

[swalker]

Back to the veil thing, I'm surprised the team EQ hasn't hit this thread harder. Just use the Shibatchi EQ in Winamp if you use your computer based on GerG's suggested setting or better yet, get the Behringer digital EQ. Regardless I don't hear veil either way.

 

[Edwood]

Sennheiser veil?

Well, it depends on which headphones you compare them to.

-Ed

 

[marios_mar]

Quote:

Originally Posted by swalker Back to the veil thing, I'm surprised the team EQ hasn't hit this thread harder. Just use the Shibatchi EQ in Winamp if you use your computer based on GerG's suggested setting or better yet, get the Behringer digital EQ. Regardless I don't hear veil either way.

we have already talked about the EQ thing. Its a purists' no-no and we have discussed why.

 

[markl]

Quote:

Most of the people hearing a veil seem to be listeners to popular music, rather than classical. Some people who hear the veil say they hear none with classical music. I have a theory that may or may not be the cause...

Uh, no. The veil is inherent to the HD600, it's part of their sound. The veil does not exist when you play this material through speakers, or through certain other cans. You may think that all headphones are the same, or that the HD600 is the magically "perfect" transducer with absolutely no sound of its own, but ask anyone here they'll tell you each headphone has its own characteristics, and the veil is one of the characteristics of the HD600 sound.

*If* this observation is accurate (and I'm not convinced it is), there's another possible explanation, which is that the veil is less obvious on classical recordings, because they are miked at a distance to begin with, with very few mikes, trying to capture the hall acoustics, so the sound is naturally presented at some remove/distance/recession from further back from the stage. Classical music itself is mellow, hazy, lazy and relaxed and probably listened to at very low volumes as well, much less likely to reveal the veil. If nothing is presented with raw immediacy, if no details are *supposed* to appear close-up, how will you know if the HD600 has a veil or not? It will be much less apparent to you.

On pop/rock recordings, OTOH, things are miked closely, multiple mikes, mixed together so you are right in the action. There are very fast, intense dynamics and transients, loud and bright sounds produced by electronic instruments and percussion/drums/cymbals. If a transducer is creating an artificial fog or creating an added sense of recession or distance from the listener, and collapsing it into a 2D plane, it's not reproducing what you are supposed to be hearing, what was recorded, or what other headphones can reproduce (more) accurately. For all these reasons, IMO, pop/rock recordings are more likely to reveal the veil.

Again, IMO, the veil is not apparent until you've heard it removed by other phones.

 

[Sovkiller]

Quote:

Originally Posted by blessingx This are difficult questions, especially since there's so much disagreement even over the existance of a 'veil', but could you give us a situation like "powered by X"? That's a biggie.

There is no disagreement on that subject, sorry, except for the Sennsheirsers lovers/apologists, the veil is just there, if you want to hear it, it is OK, if you want to pretend that is not there it is fine too, as it could be a good or bad thing in the ear of the person who is the owner. In mine it is bad, for others will be fine.
If you want to know what is, just compare it with any other detailed, extended, and not so veiled headphone, and you will see what we are talking about. OTOH, do not confuse laid backness, with the veil, these are two different things, laid backness is that the presentation is a little retired from the stage, the veils has nothing to do with that, it is an effect (a veil) that covers the whole sound, like if you were listening through a piece of cloth, that filters the sound.....I tried different cables and different equalizations, and it is not a matter of that, it is an inherent sound of the drivers of the 580/6XX, maybe they were designed like that on purpose, who knows?....Again it could be a good or bad thing, depending on the person, personal taste plays a huge roll there, as usual.....But the veil is there, and there is no way of removing it...IME...

 

[Sovkiller]

Quote:

Originally Posted by markl Personally, I'm not hung up on the frequency response ratings of equipment, you rely on the manufacturer to provide those numbers (subject to exaggeration which is rampant), and there is no adhered to industry standard either. I'm more interested in how they sound, much more reliable measure of how much I will enjoy them!

Same here, that seems that the freq measuments are pretty arbitrary, who have heard the HD650/600/580 that are rated IIRC to 12Hz-39KHz and later listen to the R-10/CD3000, that are just rated to 20Hz-20KHz, will notice what we are talking about, that is IMO not accurate at all.....so from this point on, I believe what I hear...period....Responses IMO are just for reference, over this, there is a lot of info that has nothing to do with the freq extension, as details microdynamics, etc...

 

[rodbac]

Quote:

My final thought is this: Nothing you say can convince me, because I have tried it and heard. Nothing I say will convince you, because you haven't tried it and won't give yourself even a chance to hear it.

PhilS, I'm not saying you got duped, I"m not saying anything, except this: it wasn't the power cord. If you heard that definite a difference, it was either pshychosomatic effect or something besides the power cord.

I realize you think it's some kind of shortcoming of a person if they experience the psychosomatic effect, but nothing could be further from the truth (and I'm not saying your hiss reduction was definitely due to this). I'd experience it, too.

Just know this, though: with an adequately designed power supply (and they're all adequately designed unless you built it yourself from barbed wire and chewing gum) there is no possible way for your power cord to have done anything audible whatsoever for your headphone amp.

Quote:

...so from this point on, I believe what I hear...period...

Solid reasoning.

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by markl Classical music itself is mellow, hazy, lazy and relaxed and probably listened to at very low volumes as well

Good try, but you couldn't be more wrong! Acoustic piano music has the sharpest transient dynamics you are ever likely to hear. Stravinsky is anything but mellow, lazy and relaxed. Chamber music doesn't sound hazy, and noone... I mean NOONE listens to Wagner's Ring cycle at low volumes.

The average symphony orchestra has a frequency response and dynamic range that takes full advantage of digital recording. And the piano is one of the most difficult things to reproduce realistically. Classical music is a good reference, because it is a very complex, but recognizable sound. If you have heard a live orchestra and are familiar with its sound, it's like a human voice. You can easily hear if a stereo componant is coloring it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by markl Again, IMO, the veil is not apparent until you've heard it removed by other phones.

Using one set of cans to judge another is backwards. Tell me it doesn't sound like the real instruments, say it doesn't sound as good as top notch speakers... but don't point to another brand and say that one is the way it should sound. How can you be sure the veil isn't the actual sound and the one without the veil just isn't boosted in the midranges? (Which is entirely likely for a set of headphones designed for pop music.)

I've done extensive testing of Sennheisers against the natural sound of acoustic instruments and at least two dozen sets of known speakers. Their frequency response in the core bands is extremely flat. If you want to give me another set of cans to try, I'll rack them up with my equalizer and tell you exactly which frequencies they aren't reproducing flat.

See ya
Steve

 

[immtbiker]

1812 Overture isn't hazy, lazy, relaxed, and should definitely not be listened to at low volumes.

I have the cracks on my walls to prove it. (I'm thinking of putting taller curtains on my wall to "veil" the cracks).

 

[Nak Man]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot Using one set of cans to judge another is backwards. Tell me it doesn't sound like the real instruments, say it doesn't sound as good as top notch speakers

Excellent post Steve. Btw I thought violin (not piano) would be easiest to differentiate between reality and recording ? Doesn't have much impact or transient though, maybe for 'mid' testing purposes only.

 

[bigshot]

The piano has massive transient peaks that are very often flattened out by inferior equipment. It also has very expressive envelopes to the attack and decay, and a wide dynamic range from sotto to piano. About 2/3s of the speakers I hear have trouble handling a really good piano recording. Violin is great for testing "voice presence". It sits in the same range as the human voice, and the upper harmonics are very important for the sense of realism and perspective. Another aspect that very few speakers and headphones are able to reproduce is bass definition. With an orchestral recording, you should be able to tune your ears to listen to the cellos separately from the basses. Bad speakers and cans mush them all together.

See ya
Steve

 

[markl]

Quote:

Using one set of cans to judge another is backwards. Tell me it doesn't sound like the real instruments, say it doesn't sound as good as top notch speakers... but don't point to another brand and say that one is the way it should sound. How can you be sure the veil isn't the actual sound and the one without the veil just isn't boosted in the midranges? (Which is entirely likely for a set of headphones designed for pop music.)

This argument makes no sense at all. You want to argue that comparing headphones *isn't* valid?

What should we compare them to, daffodils?

If two headphones sound different, one of them is going to be closer to accurate than another. I agree we can debate all day which one is the more accurate headphone, and we do here on this site all the time!

I'll type slow so you can follow...

OK, let's talk speakers first. I have some very good speakers in my system right now. I've had numerous speakers from $200-$2500 per pair at various times in my rig in the last 20 years. The veiling isn't there on the speakers, it's only there on the Senns. It's not there in *each and every single recording* played through other equipment as it is every time you play *anything* through the Sennheiser HD600s. (Again, I'm not commenting about the HD650s, haven't heard them in my system just in the store.) The veiling isn't there on any other high-quality headphone. There's no way for a headphone to magically "add" detail, add clarity, and resolution that isn't there, or wasn't recorded in the first place. It *is* possible for one transducer to put a damper on the sound, make it muffled, cover up or obscure the sound. You only know it's been doing that when you listen to another headphone (or speaker if you like) that doesn't do it. It's the difference between looking out at the backyard through a foggy window pane and no window at all. If that isn't obvious to you, I don't know how else to write it for you.

Also, this isn't about frequency response, as I've said consistently. It's not about a dip in the frequency response in one confined area. It's a veiling and hazy-ness that happens throughout the entire presentation, combined with an extra distancing of the sound from the listener and collapsing the soundstage. The veil is an inherent facet of the sound presentation of the cans, a characteristic, an overall coloration, a fundamental aspect of it's sound, take your pick, I don't know how to make it any more clear to you.

This is what *I* hear.

Really, I couldn't care less if you perceive a veil or not, or if you like the veiling effect and find it natural and real. But a great many Head-Fiers *do* perceive the veil (even those who like the effect).
Quote:

1812 Overture isn't hazy, lazy, relaxed, and should definitely not be listened to at low volumes.

It ain't AC/DC either, is it?

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by markl The veiling isn't there on the speakers, it's only there on the Senns.

Given the notorious veil is identified as a matting coloration caused by fabric or foam the sound waves have to travel through: yes: every speaker with a protective cover made of fabric produces «the veil» to a certain degree. But that's not just a design flaw, some of them are designed with this effect in mind. Because normal speakers have baffles, and those have the property to reflect sound waves. Doing so, they add parasitic sound to the direct sound -- with a very short time shift, so that it can't be identified as reflections, other than room reflections with their beneficial potential, but it appears as a smearing, wetting effect instead. A fabric cover (as well as an anti-reflective baffle coating) can minimize these parasitic reflections, but this comes at a price.

Quote:

There's no way for a headphone to magically "add" detail, add clarity, and resolution that isn't there, or wasn't recorded in the first place.

Yes, of course there is! There are many ways to artificially add «detail» in audio, one of them is by electronics (Aphex Exciter...), another one is by adding reflections, such as with headphones with attached acoustic lenses (Sony style) specially designed for this purpose, and besides all headphones do it more or less by causing multiple reflections between driver and ear. Sennheiser has tried (with success!) to minimize this effect by using the foam cover, which has the above-mentioned downside to cause a mat coloration instead of a wet coloration resulting from reflections. It's up to personal preference which coloration you prefer, but there's no right or wrong. Of course the added «detail» we're discussing actually doesn't have to do with increased resolution nor with high fidelity.

 

[Nak Man]

Quote:

Originally Posted by markl This argument makes no sense at all. You want to argue that comparing headphones *isn't* valid? What should we compare them to, daffodils? If two headphones sound different, one of them is going to be closer to accurate than another. I agree we can debate all day which one is the more accurate headphone

Speaking about accurate, the only way to check or gauge reproduced sound's accuracy is to compare them against real live music - or very good system / speakers with known accuracy. It's simply comparing output vs input and makes more sense, in 'accuracy' terms, than comparing outputs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by markl It ain't AC/DC either, is it?

Current pop / rock music are known to have limited dynamic range - which is not similar to loudness. AC/DC etc may sound loud but they rarely go beyond 40db range as there is no real quiet part. Compare that to slow violin passage and cannon blasting on same song, now that's a real dynamic range.