The Sennheiser "veil"

[robm321]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyll Hertsens /img/forum/go_quote.gif That's crap.

OMG LOL

 

[Davesrose]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hi-Finthen /img/forum/go_quote.gif So concludes this installment of the Sennheiser "VEIL".... To be continued~

Who wants to bet we'll have a k701 vs HD650 flame next? Burn in exists flame? Or what's the most neutral headphone flame?

I say burn-in

 

[billinkansas]

Flames you want? Here, I got your veil right here.

 

[tomb]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hi-Finthen /img/forum/go_quote.gif So concludes this installment of the Sennheiser "VEIL".... To be continued~

So Tyll blows away the Veil-ists and now you want it concluded? Not hardly, we get to pile on!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyll That's crap. ...

We should all buy from HeadRoom just for that alone ... and Senns, of course.

Seriously, that was actually the least impressive thing you said, Tyll. Thank you for that post.

 

[mirumu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomb /img/forum/go_quote.gif So Tyll blows away the Veil-ists and now you want it concluded? Not hardly, we get to pile on!

He talked about why people might think there's a veil and made a comment that with the HD650 there was an "overall tilt to the fr that was just a tad too rolled off" for his own tastes...words that could easily be interpreted as a veil depending on your definition. Not that it really matters anyway. I'm not commenting on the HD650 myself, I've never heard it. I would say though that my personal taste is not for something well behaved and lacking harshness. Musical instruments can be harsh and part of the appeal of a live music is the energy and raw aggressiveness of it all. I'd never fault anyone who wanted something easier on the ears but that isn't what we're all looking for.

 

[greggf]

I found Head-Fi about three months ago, and have read the forum incessantly since then, both back posts and current.

Tyll's post here in this thread earlier this evening is the single most impressive thing that I've read.

 

[finbad]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomb /img/forum/go_quote.gif So Tyll blows away the Veil-ists and now you want it concluded? Not hardly, we get to pile on! We should all buy from HeadRoom just for that alone ... and Senns, of course. Seriously, that was actually the least impressive thing you said, Tyll. Thank you for that post.

Actually I'm satisfied with all my choices and evolution of the sounds I now experience, after ridding myself of the Sennheiser VEIL....

veil evil ... veil evil ;-}

 

[J-Pak]

Quote:

Originally Posted by greggf /img/forum/go_quote.gif I found Head-Fi about three months ago, and have read the forum incessantly since then, both back posts and current. Tyll's post here in this thread earlier this evening is the single most impressive thing that I've read.

Have you read Darth Nut's STAX Omega 2 review?:
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=41442

This is the single best post I have read on any message board. It's not really even a review of the Omega 2. More for what to listen for in music.

 

[IPodPJ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rsaavedra /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well, I understand headphones are actually closer to microphones than to speakers with respect to the technological challenges they face to achieve excellent performance. That's why many prominent brands that make microphones (Sennheiser, Shure, AKG, Sony, etc.) also make headphones. This is not the case (at least not so strongly) for speaker manufacturers because speakers are really very different products, they have very different power and acoustic requirements and constrains. (Not to mention, different markets.)

That's very true, and if you've ever tried it, you can use headphones as crappy microphones. Usually I've found it to be the right-side earphone that you can speak into.

I wouldn't suggest using headphones as a replacement for an actual microphone because you won't get good sound quality out of it. But yes, it does prove how very similar the qualities of headphones and microphones are.

 

[Davesrose]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mirumu /img/forum/go_quote.gif Not that it really matters anyway. I'm not commenting on the HD650 myself, I've never heard it. I would say though that my personal taste is not for something well behaved and lacking harshness. Musical instruments can be harsh and part of the appeal of a live music is the energy and raw aggressiveness of it all. I'd never fault anyone who wanted something easier on the ears but that isn't what we're all looking for.

I think that gets back to presentation of headphone: the 650s have a larger soundstage then your 595 mirumu. It also has more extension....so especially unamped, the mids are really soft. When amped though, it seems like a great concert level headphone: having enough detail for an auditorium type presentation (ie classical). With a perfect rig, it gets more impact and PRAT (ie rock venue): how much soundstage and PRAT is subjective and why there's not just a Sennheiser camp. That's my interpretation of why I enjoy Sennheisers and why I've settled on them as my primary cans. I like Grados that have a small soundstage for that extra snap.

I'm not going to say anything about that flaming material

 

[greggf]

J-Pak,

Yes, I read DarthNut's Stax Omega essay. It certainly IS impressive.

But I can't say that it's the MOST impressive because *ahem* I'm not sure that I'm smart enough to understand it all.............(either that or there's a lot of unnecessary b.s. in it; I'm open to both possibilities).

 

[greggf]

Davesrose,

Would you say that Sennheiser HD650's are the sort of cans people should aspire to "grow into," not only in terms of related equipment - sources, cables, amps - but in terms of listening skills?

I ask, because I sense a "duty" to "learn to like" the HD650's, in that it would be "good for me as a person," the way we think of eating our vegetables or exercising or reading the Great Books.

I think the Senns invite a person to mature in terms of listening skills and even musical choices..........................

 

[J-Pak]

Quote:

Originally Posted by greggf /img/forum/go_quote.gif J-Pak, Yes, I read DarthNut's Stax Omega essay. It certainly IS impressive. But I can't say that it's the MOST impressive because *ahem* I'm not sure that I'm smart enough to understand it all.............(either that or there's a lot of unnecessary b.s. in it; I'm open to both possibilities).

I first read it 2 years ago when I registered, and it was a lot to digest. Especially since I listened to very little classical at the time. I reread it every couple of months and I always come out learning a little more. I think now that I can fully appreciate classical and jazz the review makes perfect sense. And the photograph analogies are pretty accurate as well.

 

[Davesrose]

Quote:

Originally Posted by greggf /img/forum/go_quote.gif Davesrose, Would you say that Sennheiser HD650's are the sort of cans people should aspire to "grow into," not only in terms of related equipment - sources, cables, amps - but in terms of listening skills?

No, I don't think that the HD650 is the end all be all for everyone. I do think that we seem to say everyone should aspire to the k1000, R10, HE90, or O2 on here...when I'm not sure it's a given that there's an ultimate. I just know that I completely am at peace with the HD650 with my setup and music tastes.

I really do believe that for the person first joining this site, looking for their first can, they should look at a begining Grado, AKG, Beyer, and Sennheiser to make sure that it gels with their music preferences. I always recommend the HD595 for a better begining Sennheiser house sound. If that person is a metal or hard rock fan, then I know they'll more then likely like a Grado. If a person likes electronica and rap: then a begining Beyer.

I've just been on a high horse about the HD650 when I hear that it completely lacks detail

But I think I'm gonna wheen myself off this site after this thread!!!

 

[cotdt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyll Hertsens /img/forum/go_quote.gif That's crap. The Sennheiser engineers put those two dips there because they represent generically the azimuth and elivation pinna cues, and in probably hundreds if quantified subjective listening test (see two of the four IEC headphone measurement standards) that particular freq resp was found most pleasing. There is a pretty significant science here in psychoacoustics, and a lot of money spent by Sennheiser, AKG, Sony, and others on engineers who are fluent in it. There's only about 3 people who frequent this board who are qualified to pass legitimate judgement on what those little dips on the 600 might be, and I'm not one of them. And neither are you. Your statement above is pure crap; you have no idea why the Sennheiser engineers put them there. The first thing I think about the Sennheiser "veil" is that most folks just aren't used to phones that are that well behaved. No harshness can sound like it's a bit rolled off if you're not used to it. But, I also think Sennheiser just chose an overall tilt to the fr that was just a tad too rolled off; if it were just 1 db less tilted I think I would like them better. Other than that, I still think they are right there with the 701, and many here at HeadRoom still like the 650 is better. Not bad for a design that's...what...6 years old. When did the 580 come out? I can't wait for the next big think from Sennheiser.

first of all, for full-sized cans the HTRF is already mostly built-in, so adding artificial "ear cues" would be redundant. none of the other headphone manufacters do this, so according to you Senn engineers must be so much smarter than all the other headphone engineers. you can worship them all you want and deny the truth that others see.

how do i know that the HD650 is not accurate? simply compare it to the reference that music is mastered for: loudspeakers. studio monitors are by definition neutral, since recordings are mastered on them and they will play the sound intended by the engineer. Compare the HD650 to the K701s and there is just no contest. The K701s are far more speaker-like.