[Starbound]

The only way you will find out is from the experience of doing those things That steel cable is .. well .. steely in it's sound, especially in the upper mids, a touch edgy with some music, though I've heard worse cables over the years. I've certainly had many years of great joy even with the steel cable and original pads, and I still have that original steel cable with it's DIN plug/adapter to 6.5mm plug on the end (I gather for balanced operation at the time), every now and then to give myself some perspective I take off the Mogami and plug in the original cable ... it doesn't stay long. That upper mid grainy edge appears immediately and lacks some body to images. In saying that, when I bought the cheap Sennheiser replacement cable, made with it's thin copper that just felt 'lacking' in quality, the sound smoothed out a bit alright, but so did some finer detail and openness, while sounding a little lifeless and boring. I went back to the steel cable at the time very quickly and stayed with that tattered item (the channel wires had separated some years back from constantly dancing around in sheer pleasure and occasionally pulling the cables from the cans ... none of which has damaged the headphones themselves - this happened many times over the years!). It was only when I used the Mogami cable on my Denon AH-D1000 cans (the famous Merkel mods elsewhere in Head-Fi) that I thought to make some cables for the Senn HD540's. I've never looked back (other than the brief re-establishment of my decision to check that I had actually upgraded by moving to the Mogami from the Steel cable by going back to the latter from time to time).
The stock HD650 cable is better than both the steel and el cheapo Senn replacements, while the Mogami is better for any Senn I've had in house, including the HD6xx I had for some months a few years ago. They just didn't have the sheer openness and organic fluidity and timbre of the HD540 Ref 1's, despite marginally finer midrange detail.
This is of course my own experience and may not be that of others.

I was about to pull the gun on this Sennheiser cable: https://en-us.sennheiser.com/accessories-connection-cable-3m-jack-35mm-hzl-26-withhout-adapter

So now I'm guessing I'm better off sourcing the parts (the Mogami wire and the connectors) and a capable iron to put my own together. I have never used a soldering iron before, but hopefully this sort of procedure (DIY headphone cables) doesn't require too much skill.

I can't believe you mentioned the grainy upper mids, because that was exactly my impression of the HD520. I think the upper mids are a little strident at times (strangely enough, more so than the treble), and I figured it might be just the character of the cans, or maybe a combination of that and the pads with fosilized foam. But perhaps the steel cable is playing its part too.

I'll post some more information about HD540 Jr. (haha) some other time, but one thing I notice is that the bass is more solid in the HD520, plus it is very well controlled (not boomy at all). Not that I find the HD540 bass lacking myself, but the 520 has more of it. The mid and treble is not as good as the HD540, but it is very good still. And the soundstage on the HD520 is huge also, though I am not sure if it is very accurate, because sometimes I hear sound from behind my head, which is a little puzzling until I let go and enjoy.

I just played that Nicola Conte track that @T1000 mentioned earlier, and wow! Having headphones that are neutral and have a great soundstage is such a treat, specially for acoustic stuff.

Another track I listened to earlier which is amazing for the soundstage and instrument positioning and dynamics is the Basket Game cue from the Indiana Jones soundtrack:

Not surprised that you pulled the cables in sheer ecstasy a fewtimes over the years. It's good to know these headphones are tough on top of all!

 

[sennsay]

I was about to pull the gun on this Sennheiser cable: https://en-us.sennheiser.com/accessories-connection-cable-3m-jack-35mm-hzl-26-withhout-adapter

So now I'm guessing I'm better off sourcing the parts (the Mogami wire and the connectors) and a capable iron to put my own together. I have never used a soldering iron before, but hopefully this sort of procedure (DIY headphone cables) doesn't require too much skill.

I can't believe you mentioned the grainy upper mids, because that was exactly my impression of the HD520. I think the upper mids are a little strident at times (strangely enough, more so than the treble), and I figured it might be just the character of the cans, or maybe a combination of that and the pads with fosilized foam. But perhaps the steel cable is playing its part too.

I'll post some more information about HD540 Jr. (haha) some other time, but one thing I notice is that the bass is more solid in the HD520, plus it is very well controlled (not boomy at all). Not that I find the HD540 bass lacking myself, but the 520 has more of it. The mid and treble is not as good as the HD540, but it is very good still. And the soundstage on the HD520 is huge also, though I am not sure if it is very accurate, because sometimes I hear sound from behind my head, which is a little puzzling until I let go and enjoy.

I just played that Nicola Conte track that @T1000 mentioned earlier, and wow! Having headphones that are neutral and have a great soundstage is such a treat, specially for acoustic stuff.

Another track I listened to earlier which is amazing for the soundstage and instrument positioning and dynamics is the Basket Game cue from the Indiana Jones soundtrack:

Not surprised that you pulled the cables in sheer ecstasy a fewtimes over the years. It's good to know these headphones are tough on top of all!

That cable you gave the link for is the el cheapo cable that's just 'ok', but nothing better. The steel cable plays the biggest part for the grainy and sharp upper mids, as soon as the Mogami replaces it that grainy edge disappears, at least with the 'wang' pleather pads I use. I have no lack of bass with my Ref1's as I use them here.
You might want to brush up on some soldering skills before you tackle those little Senn connectors. It needs a steady hand so that you don't melt half the plastic of the connectors If you have a good pal who has plenty of practice, you might want to ask him to do it for you. You will also need a covering for the bare wires once you take the sheath and shielding from the cable after you make a 'Y' junction. Thin parachute cable is best, 2-3mm max and take out the centre to leave just the soft outer. Use a piece of the glue-backed heatshrink for the Y-junction, much stronger.

 

[T 1000]

Arya vs HD 540 RG
I know that many will resent my statement like this.
Arya - just taken out of the box with stock cables
HD 540 RG -4 pin Cardas Clear Light
Simultaneously connected to Bryston BHA 1
The HD 540 proves to be a much more informative sound, a larger sound stage, more treble present, low tones equally present with the same tension. On blind listening, the HD 540 stands out as more technically capable.
Tomorrow I get 4 pin Cardas Clear Light for Arya, and they still need to burn , so I hope the sound will transform for the better.
The Aria requires more power than the HD 540 RG
P.S. Arya was purchased as an open box

 

[T 1000]

...but, after five hours Arya becomes much more open ...
The HD 540 RG is displayed as brighter, and their sound is still with more detail and greater left-right spread. For now, I would describe the sound of the Arya as a magnified Solaris SE

 

[Starbound]

That cable you gave the link for is the el cheapo cable that's just 'ok', but nothing better. The steel cable plays the biggest part for the grainy and sharp upper mids, as soon as the Mogami replaces it that grainy edge disappears, at least with the 'wang' pleather pads I use. I have no lack of bass with my Ref1's as I use them here.
You might want to brush up on some soldering skills before you tackle those little Senn connectors. It needs a steady hand so that you don't melt half the plastic of the connectors If you have a good pal who has plenty of practice, you might want to ask him to do it for you. You will also need a covering for the bare wires once you take the sheath and shielding from the cable after you make a 'Y' junction. Thin parachute cable is best, 2-3mm max and take out the centre to leave just the soft outer. Use a piece of the glue-backed heatshrink for the Y-junction, much stronger.

I don't think any of my friends uses a soldering iron, at least not that I know of. I guess I can try to teach myself online with YouTube videos and such. I will also go through your earlier posts on this topic in this thread, though I don't know how much detail you went into. I will order a few connectors, since I plan to build cables for my 540 and my 520, and hopefully I won't screw things up too much. In terms of equipment and materials, do you think it is worth it to go the DIY route just to build a handful of cables? I definitely wouldn't want to spend too much on a soldering station.

I found a couple of sources for the Mogami cable in the US that are very affordable.

 

[sennsay]

I don't think any of my friends uses a soldering iron, at least not that I know of. I guess I can try to teach myself online with YouTube videos and such. I will also go through your earlier posts on this topic in this thread, though I don't know how much detail you went into. I will order a few connectors, since I plan to build cables for my 540 and my 520, and hopefully I won't screw things up too much. In terms of equipment and materials, do you think it is worth it to go the DIY route just to build a handful of cables? I definitely wouldn't want to spend too much on a soldering station.

I found a couple of sources for the Mogami cable in the US that are very affordable.

You don't need to spend big on a soldering station, I use a $20 iron and good solder for almost everything. I don't remember the level of detail I went through to make the cables, knowing me probably quite a bit You might want to buy a little roll of 2mm solder wicking braid, just to mop up a bit of extra if you go overboard with solder. Don't forget you'll need black heatshrink (and maybe a little red for the right channel if you fancy), a small length of glue-backed heatshrink for the Y-junction and some parachute cable for the outer sheath for the separated channels. Check my previous pics for what the end result can look like and there may be pics from other's efforts as well.

 

[T 1000]

For a moment I was worried
Arya are fantastic headphones, they have a massive sound, very clean, with plenty of space in the big stage.
I completely understand the enthusiasm for them, and I join them.
They are very similar in their expansive performance to the HD 540RG, Arya has very present low frequencies, so its sound is more massive and the rest of the frequency spectrum has excellent contrast and is easily noticeable.
I am happy to have both headphones.
The Arya is far more advanced than the HE 560, and I think it would appeal to all HD 540 fans

 

[Starbound]

You don't need to spend big on a soldering station, I use a $20 iron and good solder for almost everything. I don't remember the level of detail I went through to make the cables, knowing me probably quite a bit You might want to buy a little roll of 2mm solder wicking braid, just to mop up a bit of extra if you go overboard with solder. Don't forget you'll need black heatshrink (and maybe a little red for the right channel if you fancy), a small length of glue-backed heatshrink for the Y-junction and some parachute cable for the outer sheath for the separated channels. Check my previous pics for what the end result can look like and there may be pics from other's efforts as well.

Thank you very much for all this, I will follow your tips and check the previous descriptions and pics. I think soldering is a skill that can come in handy, and what is the worst that can happen?

 

[Starbound]

I promised more over-enthusiastic ravings about the HD520 when my earpads arrive, and they arrived!

I've only been listening with the new pads for about 40 minutes, flipping through tracks and genres, and I'm having a very tough time finding something I don't like about what I'm hearing.
This is of course compared to my usual diet of HE-500, Momentum, DT-990, T20RP MKII etc...

Subjectively, the upper mids are a tad forward, and the bass rolls off a touch too early, but that's not to say it's weak or ins't there.
Objectively... these are pretty damn great.

These sound really awesome at lower volumes. (and that's not a joke about how the less you hear it the better you feel ^_^ but that they don't choke with less input)
I think there might be some distortion going on with busy tracks or bass-heavy mixes... but it's almost negligible.
There is also a slight lack of resolution and texture overall, especially in the bass, and there isn't enough percussive impact and dynamics to compete with high end modern headphones.
Easily better than any vintage K240 variant overall. Soundstage and sense of air are very musical.

I am going to keep two big eyes out for all of it's siblings.
I think these are the lightest, most comfortable headphones I've ever owned, and will easily rival my vintage DT990 and T20RP for head-time.

Blast from the past, but I wanted to quote your post because I have been listening to my HD520 for about a week, so I wanted to comment on the impression I got from them and to echo some of your observations.

First to point out that I have the HD520 (and not the HD520 II), so these would have been from the same era as the HD540, probably a little later. My guess is mid to late 80s. I don't know exactly what impedance they have, but I am inclined to think they are 300 ohms. I have read online some people say that there were HD520 made with 600 ohms at some point, but the only online manual I have found specifies 300 ohms. I guess I will have to find my multimeter to test them to know for sure. The ones I got appear to have the original foam pads, which have lost almost all flexibility. They are not flat, however. The foam is basically fossilized for lack of a better word, and not knowing how they are supposed to sound originally I don't know how much this affects their sound signature. I think part of the reason the foam pads haven't flattened out is that the clamp on these is very light. Think of the HD540 Reference II (I don't have the Reference I), and that is about the same type of fit these have. I think they might be using the same top headband, but with a cheap unpadded vinyl adjustable headband instead of the more upscale leather headband on the HD540.

Well, these are a rightful member of the golden Sennheiser era that the HD540 belongs to (mid 80s to mid 90s). The sound signature is more like the HD540 than the HD580, which I also own (late Ireland version). It is a relatively bright headphone, but not harsh at all. I can listen to these for hours and I don't get fatigued. The true circumaural fit (ears don't touch the cups or the driver cover) also contributes to this overall comfort. The way I would describe the sound signature is as balanced, natural, and clear. Basically an HD540 with slightly more bass and less perfection in the midrange and treble. I find the soundstage to be really big, much like the HD540, and the presentation to be very open and pleasant. I haven't compared with the HD540 enough to really drill more into the differences, but they are clearly headphones from the same era and using the same Sennheiser magic.

As I noticed before, I think the upper mids (specially noticeable in brass) seem slightly harsh, but this is only noticeable some times, and it doesn't deter from the good sound of the headphones. I also think that sometimes this seems to be a function of the recording itself (for example, around the 3:00 mark in "The Map Room" track from the Raiders of the Lost Ark soundtrack, there is an issue which I thought originally was the HD520, but I can also hear it, although with slightly less detail, in my Pioneer SP-BS22-LR speakers, which are not known to be bright at all). As @sennsay mentioned earlier, this slight harshness could very well be caused, or at least accentuated, by the stock steel cable which I am using. I know that "harshness" is an ugly word when talking about headphones, but it is extremely subtle.

I still think that the trebble on these might not be as accurate as the HD540. Sometimes, for example, guitar strings sound slightly metallic. But this is only slightly noticeable, and even then it doesn't take away from how great and natural these headphones sound.

As far as the bass, it goes pretty deep (I ran a test earlier and they can clearly reproduce down to 30Hz). I disagree with @GREQ that the bass is not well defined, though. At least not that I have noticed. The lowest of the low strings and bass drums sound pretty natural. The transients are overall very natural. On the top end I can hear the natural decay of bell cymbals when drums are hit, for example, in a lot of detail. These headphones shine with any acoustic music (from folk to classical), and they are very enjoyable with pretty much anything else. Even electronic music, due to the good bass extension, sounds very engaging with them. I've listened to pretty much every genre with them and they handle everything with poise.

I am really surprised with these headphones. I don't know what I was expecting. I think that even as a lesser sibling of the HD540, the HD520 are above so many cans produced since then. These appear relatively rare, BTW. They are not found very often, specially the first revision.

 

[sennsay]

Blast from the past, but I wanted to quote your post because I have been listening to my HD520 for about a week, so I wanted to comment on the impression I got from them and to echo some of your observations.

First to point out that I have the HD520 (and not the HD520 II), so these would have been from the same era as the HD540, probably a little later. My guess is mid to late 80s. I don't know exactly what impedance they have, but I am inclined to think they are 300 ohms. I have read online some people say that there were HD520 made with 600 ohms at some point, but the only online manual I have found specifies 300 ohms. I guess I will have to find my multimeter to test them to know for sure. The ones I got appear to have the original foam pads, which have lost almost all flexibility. They are not flat, however. The foam is basically fossilized for lack of a better word, and not knowing how they are supposed to sound originally I don't know how much this affects their sound signature. I think part of the reason the foam pads haven't flattened out is that the clamp on these is very light. Think of the HD540 Reference II (I don't have the Reference I), and that is about the same type of fit these have. I think they might be using the same top headband, but with a cheap unpadded vinyl adjustable headband instead of the more upscale leather headband on the HD540.

Well, these are a rightful member of the golden Sennheiser era that the HD540 belongs to (mid 80s to mid 90s). The sound signature is more like the HD540 than the HD580, which I also own (late Ireland version). It is a relatively bright headphone, but not harsh at all. I can listen to these for hours and I don't get fatigued. The true circumaural fit (ears don't touch the cups or the driver cover) also contributes to this overall comfort. The way I would describe the sound signature is as balanced, natural, and clear. Basically an HD540 with slightly more bass and less perfection in the midrange and treble. I find the soundstage to be really big, much like the HD540, and the presentation to be very open and pleasant. I haven't compared with the HD540 enough to really drill more into the differences, but they are clearly headphones from the same era and using the same Sennheiser magic.

As I noticed before, I think the upper mids (specially noticeable in brass) seem slightly harsh, but this is only noticeable some times, and it doesn't deter from the good sound of the headphones. I also think that sometimes this seems to be a function of the recording itself (for example, around the 3:00 mark in "The Map Room" track from the Raiders of the Lost Ark soundtrack, there is an issue which I thought originally was the HD520, but I can also hear it, although with slightly less detail, in my Pioneer SP-BS22-LR speakers, which are not known to be bright at all). As @sennsay mentioned earlier, this slight harshness could very well be caused, or at least accentuated, by the stock steel cable which I am using. I know that "harshness" is an ugly word when talking about headphones, but it is extremely subtle.

I still think that the trebble on these might not be as accurate as the HD540. Sometimes, for example, guitar strings sound slightly metallic. But this is only slightly noticeable, and even then it doesn't take away from how great and natural these headphones sound.

As far as the bass, it goes pretty deep (I ran a test earlier and they can clearly reproduce down to 30Hz). I disagree with @GREQ that the bass is not well defined, though. At least not that I have noticed. The lowest of the low strings and bass drums sound pretty natural. The transients are overall very natural. On the top end I can hear the natural decay of bell cymbals when drums are hit, for example, in a lot of detail. These headphones shine with any acoustic music (from folk to classical), and they are very enjoyable with pretty much anything else. Even electronic music, due to the good bass extension, sounds very engaging with them. I've listened to pretty much every genre with them and they handle everything with poise.

I am really surprised with these headphones. I don't know what I was expecting. I think that even as a lesser sibling of the HD540, the HD520 are above so many cans produced since then. These appear relatively rare, BTW. They are not found very often, specially the first revision.

I suspect that those flattened, 'fossilised' pads will lead to extra brightness and some loss of midrange impact/solidity. However, good review of them though, it would be fascinating to hear them with a set of new 'wang' pleathers.

 

[Starbound]

I suspect that those flattened, 'fossilised' pads will lead to extra brightness and some loss of midrange impact/solidity. However, good review of them though, it would be fascinating to hear them with a set of new 'wang' pleathers.

I got my 'wang' pleather earpads for my HD540, and will probably be testing those this weekend.

The original HD520 pads aren't flat at all, they are just not flexible anymore. You are probably right that they must change the sound compared to the original state. If anything, the pads must be less dense now (since they have retained the volume as far as I can tell, but they seem to have lost part of the material that made the foam flexible). These headphones sound so good as they are, but I wonder how they would sound with a different pair of pads. Besides the 'wang' pads, Sennheiser still sells the original pads (amazing longevity, thanks to Sennheiser) including the plastic mounting rings.

They are surprisingly resolving (I can pick up details like breathing, fingers running down a guitar's neck, and small glitches that I can't hear (for example) with my Sony MDR-7506 (I am thinking of selling these). Slightly less resolving than the HD540 and probably the HD580, or on the par with the HD580, I would need to carefully compare them against the same source.

I found a Dutch review from 1994 where the reviewer compared the HD520 II, HD530 II, HD540 II, HD250 II, HD560 II, and HD580, and here is what he said about the HD520:

The cheapest in this series, but qualitatively at a respectable level. There is some coloration in the middle and low, while the highs are a bit flat, with a sharp edge here and there. The bass reproduction certainly goes far (29 Hz if there is), but is, compared to the more expensive types, on the vague, sometimes too warm side. The enormous blows to the big drum and the organ pedal are fully present, but of course you always miss the sensation in the diaphragm that occurs during loudspeaker reproduction. The sound profile is less open across the board, which is also diffuse. Yet the reproduction is many times better than many loudspeakers in the more expensive class.

I don't know how different the HD520 II are from the HD520, but the comments seem plausible in context (he is comparing the HD520 II to the other more expensive members of the HD5xx lineup).

As a curiosity, the review states the list price of the lineup (in 1994) as follows:

HD520 II: 199 Dutch Guilder (110.50 USD in 1994, $197.50 in 2021)
HD530 II: 239 Dutch Guilder (132.50 USD in 1994, $237 in 2021)
HD540 II: 289 Dutch Guilder (160.50 USD in 1994, $287 in 2021)
HD250 II: 325 Dutch Guilder (180.50 USD in 1994, $322.50 in 2021)
HD560 II: 379 Dutch Guilder (210.50 USD in 1994, $376.25 in 2021)
HD580: 469 Dutch Guilder (260.50 USD in 1994, $465.50 in 2021)

(1.8 USD to Dutch Guilder exchange rate, 78.7% accumulated inflation rate)

Here is the review translated from Dutch in case anyone is interested: https://translate.google.com/transl...pusklassiek.nl/audio/audio-aw/sennheiser2.htm

I have to believe the retail prices were much lower. $465.50 for an HD580 sounds a bit too much, though $260.50 back then might have been more common. higher end audio prices have gone down in the past 25 years for sure, though the quality seems to have taken a downward trend also.

 

[T 1000]

I got my 'wang' pleather earpads for my HD540, and will probably be testing those this weekend.

The original HD520 pads aren't flat at all, they are just not flexible anymore. You are probably right that they must change the sound compared to the original state. If anything, the pads must be less dense now (since they have retained the volume as far as I can tell, but they seem to have lost part of the material that made the foam flexible). These headphones sound so good as they are, but I wonder how they would sound with a different pair of pads. Besides the 'wang' pads, Sennheiser still sells the original pads (amazing longevity, thanks to Sennheiser) including the plastic mounting rings.

They are surprisingly resolving (I can pick up details like breathing, fingers running down a guitar's neck, and small glitches that I can't hear (for example) with my Sony MDR-7506 (I am thinking of selling these). Slightly less resolving than the HD540 and probably the HD580, or on the par with the HD580, I would need to carefully compare them against the same source.

I found a Dutch review from 1994 where the reviewer compared the HD520 II, HD530 II, HD540 II, HD250 II, HD560 II, and HD580, and here is what he said about the HD520:



I don't know how different the HD520 II are from the HD520, but the comments seem plausible in context (he is comparing the HD520 II to the other more expensive members of the HD5xx lineup).

As a curiosity, the review states the list price of the lineup (in 1994) as follows:

HD520 II: 199 Dutch Guilder (110.50 USD in 1994, $197.50 in 2021)
HD530 II: 239 Dutch Guilder (132.50 USD in 1994, $237 in 2021)
HD540 II: 289 Dutch Guilder (160.50 USD in 1994, $287 in 2021)
HD250 II: 325 Dutch Guilder (180.50 USD in 1994, $322.50 in 2021)
HD560 II: 379 Dutch Guilder (210.50 USD in 1994, $376.25 in 2021)
HD580: 469 Dutch Guilder (260.50 USD in 1994, $465.50 in 2021)

(1.8 USD to Dutch Guilder exchange rate, 78.7% accumulated inflation rate)

Here is the review translated from Dutch in case anyone is interested: https://translate.google.com/transl...pusklassiek.nl/audio/audio-aw/sennheiser2.htm

I have to believe the retail prices were much lower. $465.50 for an HD580 sounds a bit too much, though $260.50 back then might have been more common. higher end audio prices have gone down in the past 25 years for sure, though the quality seems to have taken a downward trend also.

The great demand for headphones has led to a crazy jump in prices

 

[sennsay]

The great demand for headphones has led to a crazy jump in prices

Agreed, the Focal Elear cans I listened to had pinpoint imaging and a more distant soundstage than I'm used to, but I did not enjoy the music itself any more so, in fact the organic timbre and life-like feel, the emotional connection to the music is superior on my HD540 Ref1s, though to be entirely fair the Elears were played with a top end Fiio DAP and not from the Questyle QP1R and amp system I use here, which has become even more musically delicious with a few minor mods lately (not the Schiit Magni). I'm currently using the Elekit valve pre-amp, Schiit multibit DAC and hot-rodded amp/Class A power supply), liquid music with great clarity and insights into many favourite tunes that I've heard countless times and revelling in it. A long time fave, if only for certain tracks is Life Without Buildings' Any Other City album, quirky, sometimes hard to understand quite what Sue Tompkins (the singer .. for want of a better word) is saying and it's rhythmically interesting to me, bass guitar is both subtle yet essential backing to her vocalising. The last track, Sorrow, is recorded very simply but is still often hard to get right as a whole musical piece, this time though, with the system rejuvenated, I was instantly jaw-dropped. Not only was the kick drum on the far left bigger and meatier, but the sheer amount of air now coming from the bass drum knocked me out, Sue Tomkin's spoken/sung lyrics and utter bodily presence is what dropped the jaw, bass is subtle while distinct as an entity in itself, no longer lost in the background and rhythm guitar has it's own intricate delicacy. What a piece! Cymbals shimmered in intimate space, while seemingly a lot less timing distortion with the electronic mods has allowed drum and cymbal strikes and crashes to be revealed in an entirely natural way that is hard to describe, yet is obvious with every album I play, even AAC tracks from iTunes. Everything I played had an intimate organic fluidity, though there will be some folks who prefer a slightly more distant perspective and occasionally I would agree with them for some music. Ani Di Franco Live was also very intimate and 'you are there on stage with the musicians'. I have heard greater ultimate transparency (with a Sonic Frontiers SFL-1 pre-amp in the system), but not with this level of organic presence.
Never have I enjoyed Any Other City to anywhere near what I'm hearing now, the sheer body of Sue Tompkins in the music astonishes me, this is something that the Ref1s are already superb at in any of my systems, but now I'm experiencing something else again, even more real and alive. It actually shows me that the modifications to the h/p amp itself has been very beneficial now that I can hear it properly - I upped the gain on the output transistors to run a little further into Class A, along with some new shortened cables I made to go between the DAC and pre-amp, the usual pure silver Slinkylinks cables from pre to amp and a few other little mods. It leaves what I heard with the Elears far behind in heart and mind melting enjoyment, as good as they no doubt can be within an even better system than I heard them.
I'll still take the Ref1s any day!

 

[AudiophileJargon]

TImbre TUmbre tiiiiiimbre Tambre

 

[Starbound]

The great demand for headphones has led to a crazy jump in prices

And the quality/price ratio has plummeted.

I must live under a rock, because I just found out a couple of days ago that Sennheiser might be looking for a buyer for their consumer audio division.