[kg21]

Quote:

Originally Posted by blessingx /img/forum/go_quote.gif I've love to hear why the near 20% (at this point) thinks the HD650 is not good for even Classical.

I didn't vote that, I didn't vote at all since I listened to them but not for a long time. For me though, if there is even one thing wrong with the headphones or source for that matter, thats glaring (some people hate the hd650 bass, or some people say some parts of the sound are bloated, etc.) it's hard for me to get past it and enjoy the music so it could be that. Or maybe it just rubs them the wrong way, everyone hears differently. For example, I can't stand the shure sound at all, but I know a lot of people like them and it is a good product, just not for me.

 

[Andrew_WOT]

Quote:

Originally Posted by blessingx /img/forum/go_quote.gif I've love to hear why the near 20% (at this point) thinks the HD650 is not good for even Classical.

Because they own K701 and have never heard HD650 properly driven?

 

[Gurra1980]

What are you people talking about? trebble extention? To my ears this is where the 650 lacks detail, sometimes I really can hear that for example letters like k and t totally dissapears with female singers, clearly rolled of, this is sounds that is perfectly present with my ksc-75, direct A/B tested.

 

[PiccoloNamek]

I guess the quote in my sig is true, one man's resonance reduction is another man's suckout.

Anyway, the HD650's treble extension is objectively excellent, and there is no denying it.

 

[RasmusseN]

I had the same problem with Grados way too bright highs are ear piercing. I found the HD650 to be too laid back and smooth to enjoy others besides classical and jazz. If this is the same case for you I highly recommend the HD580/HD600

 

[Gurra1980]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PiccoloNamek /img/forum/go_quote.gif Anyway, the HD650's treble extension is objectively excellent, and there is no denying it.

Is there something I don't understand here? Looking at the graphes you can perfectly see that 650 has less trebble than others? and to my ears it is perfectly clear.

Or are those graphs crap?

 

[mcmyers]

Well, considering the number of people saying they're great for everything, I think I need to do a poll on whether people think a hornet + imod will provide enough juice to make 650s sound significantly better than 595s.

And if this poll is any indication (I guess it might take a few days to sort itself out), it seems as though the 650 haters are a very vocal crowd, but not a very big one.

 

[Andrew_WOT]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gurra1980 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Is there something I don't understand here? Looking at the graphes you can perfectly see that 650 has less trebble than others? and to my ears it is perfectly clear. Or are those graphs crap?

Graphs do not tell everything. Look, K701 have more bass than HD650

 

[PiccoloNamek]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gurra1980 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Is there something I don't understand here? Looking at the graphes you can perfectly see that 650 has less trebble than others? and to my ears it is perfectly clear. Or are those graphs crap?

Big spikes and peaks do not equal good extension. If anything, they actually make it more difficult to hear the upper treble.

 

[wnmnkh]

HD650 can do everything.

 

[ingwe]

I agree that the HD-650's lack low-end. I just finished listening to a solo flute--and there was absolutely no bass!

I kid, I kid.

Okay, now that I got that out of my system (err...no pun), the 650's certainly do have uber low-end, if driven properly, if it's in the recording. Astounding low-end.

My hornet drives the 650's impressively.

I also drive my 650's via the headphone out on my Bryston BP-25. This is an extremely neutral component. Source player is an Ayre CX-7 cdp (connected to the Bryston via balanced interconnects). Just amazing. Brutally honest. A s**t recording will sound that way. But, if the performance is good, that'll come shining through: the gear gets out of the way.

For me that's the most important thing: the gear gets out of the way. I can enjoy the performance, and sometimes learn something about the music, the humanity, whatever.

I would like to compare the 650 to the 600s though. That might shed light on any emphasis (+ or -) the 650's may produce.

That said, I do acknowledge that we are an eclectic mix here and our preferences and biases must be considered in context with our opinions. (blah blah). But, IMHO, for *me*, blanket statements such as, "This is good for this kind of music," or "650s are good for most kinds of music" are meaningless.

-m

 

[Gurra1980]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PiccoloNamek /img/forum/go_quote.gif Big spikes and peaks do not equal good extension. If anything, they actually make it more difficult to hear the upper treble.

ahrg, I don't get this, If they don't equal good extension, what does? is it that the headphone can reach higher?

most high end headphones go higher than 30 000hz mdr sa5000 goes up to 100 000hz and a normal human don't hear much more than 20 000hz.

 

[Marco2]

I like the 650's a lot and would never get rid of them. I have had them for over 3 years now and they are arguably still my favourite phones in some respects.

In terms of what they do best, for my tastes they are tonally well balanced, good detail retrieval and resolution. Presents a good soundstage and very comfortable to boot. I can listen to them for long amounts of time, not fatiguing.

I have never found the bass too much. In my current setup they have a nice warm mid range. The sound has nice substance and body to it which to me is one of its most endearing qualites.

I love them so much I treated them to new pads the other week and they feel and look like new again. Heres to another 3 years

 

[chris_ah1]

The fact that it can reach higher without overly influencing the relative intensities of the sound.

Just play around with an equalizer. You can simulate most of what people talk about on here. Boost the low frequencies - they are less directional and so generally and space to the music.
Boost the 1Khz and 2.5 and 4Khz ranges and you'll get the more forward sound that simulates more detail.

Ideally, we would all have perfect headphones that would calibrate themselves to our ears. If I hear 100Hz at -2db, the headphone would do +2db. Yet if I am more acute to 440Hz then perhaps the headphone can do that range at -1db. If I heard 10khz at -5db the headphone would boost by 5db and so on. That way you would get every pitch sounding at the right intensity and hence equally distinguishable from other pitches.
Well at least IMO!!!!

All I know is that if I play with the equalizer sometimes I go too far, but I can give the HD595s more space, and the SA5000s a touch of sennheiser veil...yet in doing so I reduce the 'transparency'.

just to me anyway.

Have to admit, doing critical listening to my HD595 and SA5000 before I plunge in with HD650 I don't think I'm in the mood for senn sound. SA5000s constantly give me that 'wow' or makes the music grab my attention whilst the senns are less gripping. Sony seems to have a much wider open sound with tons of detail compared to HD595. It's amazing how your opinion can change - when I first listened to the Sonys the were far more closed in than the senns which I thought were roomy.

 

[Gurra1980]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew_WOT /img/forum/go_quote.gif Graphs do not tell everything. Look, K701 have more bass than HD650

I know, but I just think that those graphs of 650 is just what I hear. And before I got the 650 almost everyone said that they where smooth and a little rolled of in the treble, this is why I find this thread so strange.