[dxanex]

   
 
I didn't notice you used a DNA Sonett 2 too. Happy with this amp for all you heaphones ?

 
Very much so! It's the least "tubey" sounding of all my tube amps, but it's got just the perfect amount of smoothness and everything sounds very fleshed out and musical. Especially running the HD 800 balanced, loads of detail but still dynamic enough to get my head bobbing and toes tapping...plus the extra gain really adds a lot of meat to the low end.
 
I suspect (and hope) this will be the last amp I purchase for quite a long time.

 

[Sorrodje]

The Sonett 2 could be my End game amp for the HD800 too. At least for a long time since I can only thought to the Eddie Current Balancing Act as a clear upgrade.  An ECBA would imply a full balanced system so  much more money.  Maybe when I'll older, richer and I'll have more room ... but right now, I've no need to change anything in my current HD800 system.

 

[Folex]

Could I ask someone to give me the dimensions of the sennheiser 800 pads? Thanks!

 

[ubs28]

I guess I'm the only one that finds the Sennheiser HD800 too heavy for long use? The Shure SRH 1840 is much lighter and comfortable for longer sessions.

 

[rawrster]

That's the first I've heard about the hd800. If those are too heavy forget about the other totl headphones in this price range.

 

[BirdManOfCT]

  I guess I'm the only one that finds the Sennheiser HD800 too heavy for long use? The Shure SRH 1840 is much lighter and comfortable for longer sessions.

I wear mine for hours without a problem. I also have glasses, and they work well with them. I'm surprised how few people comment about glasses with any headphones. Occasionally I'll get a little rub sound from the pad moving against my frame.
 
A long time ago, I used to lay down (e.g., outside) with headphones, but now it's always sitting up. The HD800 might slide a little when laying down, but I imagine they'd still be comfortable.

 

[Folex]

Despite the weight I thought the senn 800's were some of the most comfortable headphones. Their pressure points are different from most headphones. 
 
I'd hate to see your reaction to LCD3s @ 660g. The senn 800's are only 330 with the shure 1840's at 264g. 

 

[lojay]

 
+1
 
Vocals are one place the HD800s especially shine.

 
You might reconsider that view if you've heard the HE-6 properly driven and the SR009. I own all three headphones and have lived with them for about a year on TOTL amps, i.e. the Woo WA5 and EC 4-45. The HD800 shines for live instrumental recordings and depicts the soundstage with an uncanny naturalness and realism unparalleled by the SR009 and HE-6. Yet, even when modded, the HD800 lacks flesh, body and soul when it comes to vocals. 
 
That being said, the HD800 is a fine contender for vocals - just not quite the top dog when it comes to that aspect.
 
When unmodded and paired with solid state amps and delta-sigma DACs, some find the reproduction of vocals by the HD800 grainy or even sibilant. This can be remedied by the Anax mod, use of OCC copper cables, tube amping (the 4-45 is the best I've heard, so is the Teton I've read) and most importantly, the use of a smooth DAC (most likely an R2R DAC).
 

Not sure where you heard that rumor. To my ear, there is no finer reproduction aside from an electrostatic headphone costing twice as much. 

 
As above. Not a rumour, but pretty much a (relative) fact if you compare the HD800 to planars and electrostatics. The HD800 remains the best dynamic I've heard so far, though.

 

[drez]

Guess depends how you want vocals, HD800 doe a great job bringing out all the nuance and vocal inflections and do a great job with dynamic contrast.
 
Haven't heard the HE-6 for a while, but a long time ago, I did find them more full bodied and present, but unable to convey delicacy.
 
009 haven't had the pleasure of hearing in a while.  Priced out of my reach
 
I can relate to comments about grain - more likely this is coming from recording and DAC, and the amplifier and HD800 are just passing this along without smoothing over the graininess.  Still a downside for though as one can't really fix the recording.

 

[GardenVariety]

 
 
As above. Not a rumour, but pretty much a (relative) fact if you compare the HD800 to planars and electrostatics. The HD800 remains the best dynamic I've heard so far, though.

 
As I said in my quote, the HD800 clearly aren't as good as a pair of SR009's. I would argue that they compete nicely with planars. 

 

[kothganesh]

   
As I said in my quote, the HD800 clearly aren't as good as a pair of SR009's. I would argue that they compete nicely with planars. 

GV,
 
I own both now and have some decent amps for each. I am not going to use the word "clearly" (IMO of course). In fact, I am going to stick my neck out and say that there are times when the HD 800 is "top dawg". That's because I love the sound stage of the 800 so much and it is my opinion that the SR-009 is slightly smaller in comparison. 
 
To be clear, I don't think there is a clear difference but the differences are a heck of a lot more subtle for me. I also happen to concur that the 800 is better than the planars except maybe the HE 6 well amped. Let the discussion begin 

 

[johnjen]

Every type of (non IEM) headphone (planar, electrostatic, dynamic) has its strengths and weakenesses.
These attributes are a result of the technology used and the limits of the design and type of 'motor' employed.
 
We pick which set of these attributes we enjoy.
 
Electrostatics are fast, really fast, (due to their light weight membrane) and due to the nature of the 'motor' involved which can kinda sorta 'tailor' the amount of surface area used, based upon the frequency they are fed.
But they can't 'move air'.
They simply don't have the range of excursion to make powerful bass with visceral impact.
But they do have the harmonic relationships and cohesiveness that are its hallmarks.
 
Planars are also fast and they can move air for good bass response but the whole membrane has to move as one, so some of the subtlties of the extreme high end are at a bit of a disadvantage compared to electrostactics.
And if they have magnets on both sides of the diaphram, the sound must pass thru the physical structure that holds them in place on the head facing side.  This introduces a complex problem in that the wave front is 'broken up' and 'reassembled' before we hear it.
 
And with single sided magnet planars the response of the diaphram tends to be 'non-linear' in that the magnetic field tends to loose strength as the diaphram moves away from the magnets.  This can be somewhat compensated by the design but it is an 'unbalanced' arrangement regardless.
 
Dynamics have the heaviest diaphram so they tend to be detail limited in the high frequencies compared to the electrostatics.  And the ability to change directions quickly is also not as precise as the electrostatics.
But they can move air because they do have a much greater excursion than either off the other 2 types.
They also can deliver a 'unified' wave front like the electrostatics but unlike the dual sided magnet planars.
 
When taken to the 'extremes' dynamics can provide the high freqency response we want which tends to close the gap between them and electrostatics.  
And they can deliver the extreme low end bass response of the planars.
Which puts them sorta right in the middle.
Also (this is a bit of guess work here based upon past designs etc.) the design of the 800's dynamic driver, since it must be full range, seems to be designed to handle the extremes of the low frequencies vs the highs using different parts of the diaphram.  This is a purposeful 'trick' of the design and when dialed in yields the best of both worlds.
I suspect that this is what makes the 800's driver deliver such a wide bandwidth, with the authority and delicacy we notice and delight in.
 
When I had a new pair of LCD-x's here for evaluation, on my system the mids and top end were a bit 'veiled' in comparison to the 800's.  And while I could hear the bass impact, they bass lacked the definition and detail that I heard from the 800's.
 
These traits can make the LCDx's an easier match up with a wider range of source equipment, which can be either a help or a hinderance depending upon what attributes one is seeking.
 
And I must confess I have not heard the latest electrostatics but traditionally they have always been difficult to get the bass to match, to the same level of performance, as the rest of the audio spectrum at which they excel.
 
Bottom line for me is 800's have 'enough' of the strengths to satisfy me, albeit at the expense of being 'picky' with what is fed to them, which is a characteristic they share with electrostatics.  Whereas planars can be much more 'forgiving' of source equipment.
 
And yes there are exceptions to all of this.
 
But when the electrostatics or the 800's are dialed in and fed an 'optimal' signal they will (or can) deliver astonishing results, and I like to think of the planars as 'fun'.  And for me fun only lasts a while, until I begin to miss the strengths of inner details and hearing into the music vs being presented with music to listen to. 
 
But then those are the attritbutes I choose…
 
JJ

 

[lojay]

GV,
 
I own both now and have some decent amps for each. I am not going to use the word "clearly" (IMO of course). In fact, I am going to stick my neck out and say that there are times when the HD 800 is "top dawg". That's because I love the sound stage of the 800 so much and it is my opinion that the SR-009 is slightly smaller in comparison. 
 
To be clear, I don't think there is a clear difference but the differences are a heck of a lot more subtle for me. I also happen to concur that the 800 is better than the planars except maybe the HE 6 well amped. Let the discussion begin 

 
Agreed. I like the HD800 better for large scale classical and live recordings in general where the atmosphere and staging is required

 

[GardenVariety]

I also have to point out that I use the Smyth Realiser for all my listening so it's incredibly specialized and biased. I've had about 15 pairs of headphones specially EQ'd through this system and the HD800's are by the far the best. My 404LE's were the only other set that were transparent enough to make the headphones disappear and give the illusion of speakers. They are also the only headphones that leave zero pressure or pain after hours of use which is a small miracle considering I've got a large shaved head and wear glasses. 

 

[Sorrodje]

@lojay @kothganesh et @Johnjen : great posts.

 
The HD800 is indeed not the king for mids. When I compared the HD800 and the SR009 that's what I realised: SR009's mids are so "right" . But I wouldn't trade the soundstage for the mids . Matter of tastes I presum and I listen more to instrumental music so vocals are not my priority.
 
That been said, I've no problem to listen to Youn Sun Nah , James Blake, Newton Faulkner, Dietrich Fischer Dieskau or even Norah Jones for example.
 
BTW I can confirm that the choice of DAC and amp is really important. I listen much more vocals since I have my Metrum Octave for example. I didn't notice this fact during the first month but after the read of Purrin's review of the Octave I realized that the strong point of this R2R dac is mids and I realized that I've changed my habits and I've started to listen to lot more vocals.
 
I heard my HD800/Sonett 2 and a SR009/EC Electra side by side during an hour at home, with my music in a perfectly quiet environnement.  The SR009 is definitely more neutral and faster, has more mids and better mids. Overally , IMO the SR009 is closer to what we could call the top notch fidelity and accuracy.  so SR009 wins ... but not by a large margin IMO. and IMO the HD800 provides more wow effect due to its incredible soundstage , more bodied, energetic and impactful sound. If i should give a metaphor to explain my feelings : The SR009 could be the Old wise man who don't need to impress to tell the truth and the HD800 a kind of slightly more immature and aggressive youngster.  Right now I prefer to live with the Youngster. Maybe I'm not old enough myself.
 
Right now, the three best headphones I've ever heard are the SR009, the Abyss and the HD800. Each one had its pros and cons but neither the 009 nor the Abyss would replace the HD800 in my  heart right now. Even if I had the money to purchase them and buid the system accordingly.  I don't consider that those headphones are complementary . They are more three different way of seeing a TOTL headphone.  e
 
I haven"t heard the HE-6 yet. I like a lot the HE-4 and the HE-500 so I would be very surprised to not like the big brother . I didn't like the HE-560 at all though ( I couldn't ignore the agressive sibilant treble and the overall fatiguing forwardness of the sound.... Even EC 4-45 an Metrum hex didn't help) ... it was at a meet though so Maybe these impression are completely biased.
 
 
For all these headphones, the whole system definitely matters.