[moodyrn]

There's a big misconception here that neutral and flat are synonymous terms, and there's a lot of confusion when people use the two together. They are not the same thing, and you can have one without the other. Some headphones have one or the other, very few actually have both.
 
A "flat" headphone refers to pretty much what you see on a graph. It refers to the frequency response, or in simple terms how the lows, mids, highs integrate with each other. A neutral headphone refers to the color temperature, or the tone. A headphone can have a flat response but still be colored. A headphone can also have a very neutral sound signature, but not really be flat. So that's why measurements should be taken with a grain of salt. Although a headphone might measure pretty flat on a graph, it won't tell you the tone which may be a little warm, or more on the neutral side.

 

[vid]

Quote:

A "flat" headphone refers to pretty much what you see on a graph. It refers to the frequency response, or in simple terms how the lows, mids, highs integrate with each other. A neutral headphone refers to the color temperature, or the tone. A headphone can have a flat response but still be colored. A headphone can also have a very neutral sound signature, but not really be flat. So that's why measurements should be taken with a grain of salt. Although a headphone might measure pretty flat on a graph, it won't tell you the tone which may be a little warm, or more on the neutral side.

 
You've mixed up measurement, mismeasurement, and perception. A compensated measurement can show any type of line the person making it wishes. Likewise, the brain can take in a wonky sound response and be oblivious, thinking it's neutral.
 
In most cases, you can measure a pair of headphones people think are neutral and find the mids more or less flat. Depending on the rest of the spectrum, people's subjective impressions tend to be of three types then: 'neutral', 'neutral/bright', or 'neutral/warm'.

 

[Greed]

Quote:

Not even close. I use the ER4 as a measure of neutrality. Not only are they audibly neutral, but it shows in the graphs. The sound of the HD650 on the other hand, is far from neutral, and its not even that close graphically. The $60 Sony V6 is more neutral.
 
 

Spoiler: Warning%3A%20Spoiler!

 

 
I just want to point out that the thread title is asking if the HD600 is the more neutral, not the HD650. Just a correction, that is very critical. 
 
Also, this thread seems to have various opinions, but everyone seems to agree that the HD600 is NOT the most neutral headphones right now. So the rest of the talk should be taken the the sound science sub-forum yes? 

 

[TMRaven]

It does depend a lot on the compensation used.  With graphs such as inner-fidelity and headroom, a little recession in the upper midrange area is more along the lines of flat, whereas graphs like goldenears and moreso Purrin's, a flat line is more or less closer to flat to what you'd see on your average speaker measurement.  There's also the fact that distortion-- which isn't given on any of the fr graphs in this thread, also plays a large role in frequency response.  Often headphones with large amounts of thd in the bass will have way more perceived bass than their fr graphs indicate.

 

[BobG55]

What I enjoy the most out of the HD600 sound is the balance & clarity.  Right now I'm listening to Jeff Beck, "Blow by Blow" c1975 (produced by George Martin).  My sources are : TEAC PD-H600 (PD-H600 uses the Burr Brown PCM1796 D/A converter, a 192kHz/24-bit component) & Kenwood KA-8006 (70WPC) vintage integrated amplifier (1974); the HD600 replacement cable is from Headroom, Cardas Fatpipe cable for HD6XX.  
 
The sound is simply exquisite.  I was listening to the album with my HD650s previously and the difference I noticed immediately when I switched to the HD600 was the forward clarity of the cymbals & ping sound (sibilance free) while simultaneously hearing all of the other instruments & nuances, perfectly balanced; some in the background but never overwhelmed.  My amp is set at it's most neutral possible i.e. the loudness option is never activated;  I only put the emphasis on the filters to bring out the subtleties when I'm listening at a reasonable high volume.  
 
This set up which is about all I can afford works wonders & truly makes the HD600 perform at it's peak.  They never sound coloured at any time.  As for the lack of bass or sub bass mentioned so often, let me just say that I can feel the bass in the sound as well as hear it i.e. the bass drum is felt & is always there & it's a special kind of subtleness by which I mean you can't miss it and I believe these headphones were designed this way in order to capture every sound possible without any over powering bass/sub bass or added treble/sibilance.  Again, when properly driven the bass sound/feel is unmistakably present.  It's quite ingenious when you consider it.  I've owned the HD800 in the past & I still prefer the HD600 overall.  I'm not saying they are better or dissing the HD800 but merely expressing my personal preference.  I've owned the HD600s for over 10years (the ones I'm listening to now are my 2nd pair) & I have always come back to them eventually.  When I put them on after having put them aside for a while and turn the music on they never fail to bring a smile on my face & a nod because my ears & brains are saying to me  : "Ah yes, good ol' 600s, they've never let me down" They're like an old pair of slippers which you can wear all day/night in complete & total comfort.  
 
Sorry for being long winded : to my ears YES they are neutral & thus permits me to adjust them, tweak them ever so slightly with a good amp to bring out the best of them & that's when they truly shine.  
 
Neutral AND subtly adjustable with proper source = makes them shine.
 

 

 

[daltonlanny]

Sorry to post in an older thread.
In my own personal opinion, the HD600 comes closest to neutral of any headphone I have ever heard or auditioned, and I have heard the very expensive ones.
The only very slight deviations from absolute neutrality, to my ears, on the HD600, are a slight lack of bass below 40hz, a very slight midbass hump, and a very slight roll off in the top octave, but all other top headphones I have auditioned deviate somewhat worse, or a lot worse from neutral than the HD600.
I feel the HD600 is also closer to absolute neutrality than the 650 as well.
The 650 sounds like it has more of a midbass hump, and more of a roll off in the top end, even though the 650 seems to have very slightly better resolution, and less grain than the 600.
Instruments and voices seem to have more body on the 650, but I feel that this is coloration, and not neutrality.
The HD800 has higher detail resolution and better imaging than the 600, but I feel it is a touch too hot in the mid treble region, even with a great source and high dollar amp.
The Beyerdynamic Tesla has higher resolution, better dynamics, and punchier bass than the 600's, but has some sometimes annoying brightness issues in the treble regions.
The Audeze LCD 2 revision 2 has deeper bass, better dynamics, and more midrange body, but sounds somewhat recessed in the low/mid treble compared to the 600.
The Beyerdynamic DT880 is fairly neutral, but has a sometimes annoying peakiness in the lower top octave, and sounds somewhat dry.
My modded Q701 Quincy Jones are pretty neural too, but are slightly thin compared to the 600, and seem to have a slight peaky sound that I would guess to be around 2khz and maybe 7khz.
Overall, my HD600's are my current favorite "go to" headphones.
Just my opinion and 2 cents.

 

[Hifihedgehog]

I have heard and abhorred many of the same sonic issues of the headphones you outlined there. For a visual form of proof of this,  I point you to the following graphs. All the graphs from places like HeadRoom, Reviewed and GoldenEars do not line up really with my listening experiences but these ones actually do.
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/409732/some-more-frequency-response-graphs
 
You will notice that the HD600 is all but absent but here is how you can essentially get a gist of what the HD600 sonic graph looks. First, refer to the graph of the HD650 in this thread. Next, mentally superimpose what you see in HeadRoom's comparison chart of the HD600 versus the HD650. In doing so, you wil notice you practically have a flat and neutral headphone. At least, this was my observation about a month ago after a two hour listening session at Sweetwater's brick and mortar store in Fort Wayne, where, by the way, I also was able to do quick, head-to-head comparisons with the Sennheiser HD650 and HD800, AKG K812 and Shure SRH1540.
 
Just like you, my favorites of the pack were the HD600 for the exact same reason you gave--so natural yet keenly neutral. Others like the AKG and Shure were hampered with clearly audible bass and treble quirks. Meanwhile, the HD800 gave me listening experience which were as incredible as the stories tell, giving me the uncanny ability to sense superficial differences as, for example, miking setup differences (voicing, eq'ing, and acoustics) between individual sounds in a recording without any mental extertion on my part. However, it was almost too detailed for my liking and just slightly too hot in mid treble regions, but thankfully no where on the scale of what the Beyerdynamic or AKG cans do.
 
As a bit of a quick history lesson, these graphs date way back to a fellow on Head-Fi by the name of JaZZ who had scanned these from the German magazine Stereoplay. It goes to show that newer doesn't always equal better and, if anything, the release of the Beats Audio brand is clear proof that the market still has a ways to go before it gets any better.

 

[Lord Raven]

Just read the entire thread, I am a proud owner of HD600 and bringing in T1 Gen 1 to the mix Thanks guys!

 

[ubs28]

Shure SRH 1840 is more neutral than the HD 600. It has no mid bass boost and it doesn't have a dip in the mids.