Out of curiosity, why would you say that? I find iFi products pretty decent in the "performance" side of things. Their overarching design language leaves a less-than-pleasant aftertaste, but that is a subjective preference.
What's the most overrated can?
- Thread starter matti621
- Start date
dazKewl
100+ Head-Fier
tigon_ridge
1000+ Head-Fier
Add my votes for HD600 and HD650.
The frequency response of the HD600 is probably the only great thing about it. Also has a clean CSD measurement. Unfortunately, it's slow, and lacks bass extension. That's why it sounds muffled or veiled, relative to many of the faster, more resolving headphones out there. Don't even give me that nonsense about how you need to drive these with exceptional amps. I've driven them SE and balanced through powerful amps. Didn't change anything. Still slow and not very transparent.
People love these headphones because they're forgiving and easy to listen to, not because they're truly hi-fi equipment. They're not. They're dynamically compressed. I remember A/Bing a pair of $20 sony earbuds against a HD650, and honestly they sounded equally detailed. That shocked me so hard, I wanted to exit the hobby immediately. Learned many years later that apparent they required a much more powerful amp. Okay...plugged into Schiit Mjolnir, balanced. Maybe it opened up some, but it's still nowhere near as detailed as a Stax, or many planars. You can EQ almost any headphones to have near-perfect timbre accuracy, so the FR of the HD600 isn't even all that important to me.
The frequency response of the HD600 is probably the only great thing about it. Also has a clean CSD measurement. Unfortunately, it's slow, and lacks bass extension. That's why it sounds muffled or veiled, relative to many of the faster, more resolving headphones out there. Don't even give me that nonsense about how you need to drive these with exceptional amps. I've driven them SE and balanced through powerful amps. Didn't change anything. Still slow and not very transparent.
People love these headphones because they're forgiving and easy to listen to, not because they're truly hi-fi equipment. They're not. They're dynamically compressed. I remember A/Bing a pair of $20 sony earbuds against a HD650, and honestly they sounded equally detailed. That shocked me so hard, I wanted to exit the hobby immediately. Learned many years later that apparent they required a much more powerful amp. Okay...plugged into Schiit Mjolnir, balanced. Maybe it opened up some, but it's still nowhere near as detailed as a Stax, or many planars. You can EQ almost any headphones to have near-perfect timbre accuracy, so the FR of the HD600 isn't even all that important to me.
Kammerat Rebekka
1000+ Head-Fier
We hear so differently it’s absurd. I would take the HD600 over just about any estat that isn’t the Orpheus.
A boosted midrange or treble performance does not equate to more detail per my ears.
Most overrated cans imho?
The Abyss AB-1266 TC. Holy moly what a trainwreck.
A boosted midrange or treble performance does not equate to more detail per my ears.
Most overrated cans imho?
The Abyss AB-1266 TC. Holy moly what a trainwreck.
tigon_ridge
1000+ Head-Fier
My L300 gets its treble slashed severely by my EQ setting and it still sounds way more detailed and transparent than my HD600 in stock mode. "Fake detail" by treble boost is overestimated. My Sundara, same story against the HD600, but to a slightly less degree. Nothing I've owned beats my L300 for resolution and speed.
I hardly ever read many outstanding things about the Abyssmal (see what I did there?) 1266, so I'm not sure how that could be overrated. There's pretty much a global consensus that they're pretty goofy, both looks and sound-wise, for what they cost.
Kammerat Rebekka
1000+ Head-Fier
The only stuff I currently EQ is bass. After that the upper mids and treble are too dependant on one’s earcanal that it ends up getting very complex.
The only way I’ve ever been able to EQ properly was in collaboration with my friend’s specially made in-ear mics and some other gear that I don’t recall the names of.
I have never enjoyed Stax and most other estats because they all seem to come with a huge belly of energy around 1k. Methinks that is the main reason why folks feel they sound so detailed.
I honestly hear more of the recording over the 600 vs my Sundara…though not in the bass and low bass.
If you take a look around you’ll see plenty of folks with an AB-1266 TC
The only way I’ve ever been able to EQ properly was in collaboration with my friend’s specially made in-ear mics and some other gear that I don’t recall the names of.
I have never enjoyed Stax and most other estats because they all seem to come with a huge belly of energy around 1k. Methinks that is the main reason why folks feel they sound so detailed.
I honestly hear more of the recording over the 600 vs my Sundara…though not in the bass and low bass.
If you take a look around you’ll see plenty of folks with an AB-1266 TC
Last edited:
tigon_ridge
1000+ Head-Fier
That's surprising about the 1266. I still think it's looks like a medieval head clamping torture device.The only stuff I currently EQ is bass. After that the upper mids and treble are too dependant on one’s earcanal that it becomes guess work on my behalf.
The only way I’ve ever been able to EQ properly was in collaboration with my friend’s specially made in-ear mics and some other gear that I don’t recall the names of.
I have never enjoyed Stax and most other estats because they all seem to come with a huge belly of energy around 1k. Methinks that is the main reason why folks feel they sound so detailed.
I honestly hear more of the recording over the 600 vs my Sundara…though not in the bass and low bass.
If you take a look around you’ll see plenty of folks with an AB-1266 TC
The resolution of the L300 has nothing to do with frequency response, and there's nothing unusual about the 1k. It only starts to ramp up around 1.5k, and it's not that drastic either. Follows the harman curve somewhat, though not even aggressively enough. I had to boost up the 1k-4k range to achieve better adherence to the compensation curve. The resolution is mostly due to their combination of very fast, dry, tight presentation, combined with super precise imaging. They have narrow soundstage, which hurts their perceived resolution somewhat, but there's a lot of height. They're somewhat midrange forward, that's true, but the HD600 is even more so.
I also thought at one point that I was hearing more from my mid-fi Sennheisers than my drier cans. The HD650 gave me goosebumps when I first heard binaural recordings through them, because they seemed to give everything more dimension and tactility. I eventually realized that was because those slower-decay headphones tend to "stretch out" sound, to give them more body/weight/dimension, by extending their decay. It's artificial, however. I noticed that real instruments and vocals, without amplification, don't sound anything like that. HD600 and HD650 give things artificial body/weight/texture, that people perceive as "natural," when it's anything but. It's actually more in the veins of "fake details" than even boosted treble.
Did I already mention the dynamics part? The ability to play very soft and very loud in the same phrase. The mid-tier Senns lack that as well. That leads them to sound less fatiguing and more laid back. Realistically presented vocals and instruments can go from very soft to very loud, then soft again, and it can be pretty jarring. However, I prefer an honest representation of my music, rather than a relaxed version of it. I think that may be one of the reasons why you perceive Stax as overly mid-forward; because many instruments in the midrange can jump from soft to loud very often in a recording, and the more dynamically uncompressed headphones like some Staxes will present it with brutal honesty. I agree that can be fatiguing, but that's reality. My HE-400 (2014) and Sundara also exhibit this trait. You either just have to be willing to lower the volume a bit, or rest longer between tracks. Edit: Or, you can listen to the soft, pillowy, dynamically compressed mid-tier Senns, smoothing out all the peaks and valleys that exist in the signals.
Last edited:
HD600 and 650 were my first audiophile headphones. I keep them and bust them out every once in a while. I love the sound and they are so cheap that to me they are actually undervalued. $220 for an HD6XX is ridiculously cheap for the sound you get. I love the sound of the HD600. It sounds pleasant to my ear even after listening to much higher quality and higher resolving headphones. Overrated? Not to me.
Hifiearspeakers
Headphoneus Supremus
Spot on. Couldn't agree more.
tigon_ridge
1000+ Head-Fier
Well, I still have mine, so it's not like I think they sound bad. They're exceptionally comfortable, and sometimes I don't want sheer honesty from my audio. They're definitely overrated due to their lack of low end and dynamically compressed presentation, for something that at the time was praised incessantly as some of the highest-fidelity and potentially endgame-worthy. Either my $20 sony buds at the time were exceptionally hifi for a Walmart buds, or the community's BS about how resolving HD650 could be was just a bunch of clueless audiophiles sniffing each other's...nevermind. I know my ears weren't lying to me.
L300 is like the HD600/650 of the estat world for me. Overperforming with good FR. I'd still take the HD600/650 over it. The L300 is without a doubt better technically but it has the classic estst timbre while the HD600/650 have one of the best timbres on the whole market regardless of price for my taste. I didn't really know you could EQ the timbre of a headphone. Tonality yes but the timbre itself? How would you EQ away the metallic timbre of a Utopia for example?
Earlier the HD600 and now the HD650 were always benchmarks for me. When i got a more expensive pair of headphones i'd first ask if they are worth it over the HD600 or 650 for me. For example currently i have the HE1000SE and the Empyrean. I think both aren't worth it over the HD650. The HE1000SE is maybe 10% better technically but has the more unnatural planar timbre and the Empyrean is on the same level as the HD650. Even has the same concept. Middling technicalities with relaxed sound and natural timbre. The only advantage is that it doesn't need a desktop setup.
HD600/650 are underrated for me because they usually count as midfi but i think they're worthy endgames you could build a setup around. If the Empyrean counts as endgame the HD650 has to count too.
Earlier the HD600 and now the HD650 were always benchmarks for me. When i got a more expensive pair of headphones i'd first ask if they are worth it over the HD600 or 650 for me. For example currently i have the HE1000SE and the Empyrean. I think both aren't worth it over the HD650. The HE1000SE is maybe 10% better technically but has the more unnatural planar timbre and the Empyrean is on the same level as the HD650. Even has the same concept. Middling technicalities with relaxed sound and natural timbre. The only advantage is that it doesn't need a desktop setup.
HD600/650 are underrated for me because they usually count as midfi but i think they're worthy endgames you could build a setup around. If the Empyrean counts as endgame the HD650 has to count too.
Which estats did you try? Sounds like the SR-009 and the Lambdas. Try the Hifiman Jade II and the SR007 Mk.1. They shouldn't have it.The only stuff I currently EQ is bass. After that the upper mids and treble are too dependant on one’s earcanal that it becomes guess work on my behalf.
The only way I’ve ever been able to EQ properly was in collaboration with my friend’s specially made in-ear mics and some other gear that I don’t recall the names of.
I have never enjoyed Stax and most other estats because they all seem to come with a huge belly of energy around 1k. Methinks that is the main reason why folks feel they sound so detailed.
I honestly hear more of the recording over the 600 vs my Sundara…though not in the bass and low bass.
If you take a look around you’ll see plenty of folks with an AB-1266 TC
So you hear the HD 600/650 like I hear them, I personally agree with you about them. The slow decay gives them the illusion of more body. The too long decay is artificial imho but many seem to like it. But their problems with their decay became very obvious when I heard the DT 48/480 at length which have very quick and very detailed drivers and a lot of real body and dynamics the illusion of the full-bodied sound of the HD 600/650 was shattered and I could never hear them the same anymore, then I heard more and more headphones and it became more obvious to me about the effect their decay has on their sound. It doesn’t mean they are bad nor do I dislike them. I do enjoy the Senns FR response and sound balance overall though and they do sound really nice on some systems and songs, but I always found them limited on what they work well with.
Last edited:
Kammerat Rebekka
1000+ Head-Fier
I was just about to say that I disagree with pretty much everything he said
Deolum: I’ve been recommended the 007 V1 a couple of times before but sadly never had a chance to listen to it. The V2 is not my cup of tea. The 009 even less so.
I’ve heard the Jade and thought it sounded wonderful…for an estat. It sounded to me like a more refined version of the HE1000..though with much poorer bass extension. It had that classic mid drop-off around 1-1,5k like many a planars also display.
Still tonality-wise it’s one of the best estats I’ve heard.
Speaking of which. The finest can I ever tried was the Orpheus…and well that one is just nuts dinero-wise…yet from the frequency response Jude posted of the new Audeze Crbn, it genuinely looks to be in the same ballpark tuning-wise aka HD600 with proper subbas extension. Literally the only estat I’ve ever contemplated getting. I’d need a testdrive beforehand though.
Deolum: I’ve been recommended the 007 V1 a couple of times before but sadly never had a chance to listen to it. The V2 is not my cup of tea. The 009 even less so.
I’ve heard the Jade and thought it sounded wonderful…for an estat. It sounded to me like a more refined version of the HE1000..though with much poorer bass extension. It had that classic mid drop-off around 1-1,5k like many a planars also display.
Still tonality-wise it’s one of the best estats I’ve heard.
Speaking of which. The finest can I ever tried was the Orpheus…and well that one is just nuts dinero-wise…yet from the frequency response Jude posted of the new Audeze Crbn, it genuinely looks to be in the same ballpark tuning-wise aka HD600 with proper subbas extension. Literally the only estat I’ve ever contemplated getting. I’d need a testdrive beforehand though.
Last edited:
Maybe the HE60 is an alternative. Would love to get one too but they're so hard to find and i can't terminate the cable myself in normal stax connectors.I was just about to say that I disagree with pretty much everything he said
Deolum: I’ve been recommended the 007 V1 a couple of times before but sadly never had a chance to listen to it. The V2 is not my cup of tea. The 009 even less so.
I’ve heard the Jade and thought it sounded wonderful…for an estat. It sounded to me like a more refined version of the HE1000..though with much poorer bass extension. It had that classic mid drop-off around 1-1,5k like many a planars also display.
Still tonality-wise it’s one of the best estats I’ve heard.
Speaking of which. The finest can I ever tried was the Orpheus…and well that one is just nuts dinero-wise…yet from the frequency response Jude posted of the new Audeze Crbn, it genuinely looks to be in the same ballpark tuning-wise aka HD600 with proper subbas extension. Literally the only estat I’ve ever contemplated getting. I’d need a testdrive beforehand though.
bagwell359
Headphoneus Supremus
600's have a lot more bass on my OTL amp (BHC). More bass by a lot than on my Ragnarok 1 driving XLR cables.
Users who are viewing this thread
