[Gojira]

I voted yes, but I still love them. The price you pay for the sweetness and musicality is a very subtle "veil". That is not to say that it is "muffled" or lacking in detail though. I find the sound to be quite beautiful when powered from a sufficiently good source. Having said that, it would be nice if Sennheiser could figure out how to remove that while retaining all of that luscious sweetness.

 

[fiddler]

Wow, we're pretty evenly split...

 

[scottpaul_iu]

I voted yes. I never really took to the Sennheiser's. Either the 580 or 600. This is what I hear. I find that the mids are distant sounding and recessed. I hear the performers being further from me. This is not what I hear with my speakers which are Artemis EOS or Magnepan 3.6's.

 

[Hirsch]

I gotta laugh. Sorry

Listen to the HD-600 using an amp that can feed them, and you'll hear a lot of things, but a veil isn't one of them. Note the distinctions that have been made previously. Laid back isn't veiled. Nor is lack of brightness. "Hazy, fogged and muffled" is how I'd use the term, but the HD-600 ain't it. Try it with a HAP-03 or a Singlepower amp. Particularly with the Singlepower Supra, the amount of detail laid out in crystal clarity can astonish (and it loses no musicality).

I suspect the split is really about who's heard the HD-600 pushed to what it can do, and those whose equipment isn't giving it what it needs. I've found way too many combinations of very good pieces of equipment where the whole is less than the sum of the parts. And I've heard a number of combinations where the HD-600 sounds "veiled". However, since I've also heard setups where it isn't, the only conclusion I can reach is that the "veil" is not an inherent characteristic of the headphone, but a characteristic of the entire setup. The HD-600 gets more than its share of the blame, simply as the end transducer.

 

[Solude]

Viel, you bet. Unnatural, unintilligable, dark, recessed and blahish at low volume. You really need a direct comparison to realise it though. Otherwise you just accept it as the norm since the Senn is such a highly regarded headphone. How can this be out of the norm if the Senn is so touted? At high volumes things turn right around though but I find the level required to get there to high for day to day long term listening.

So far my least vieled headphone is the Beyer DT880. No air, no recession just pure direct recording to ear, very nice. I might just stop my search here and start the tube amp experiment

 

[lan]

Quote:

Originally posted by Hirsch However, since I've also heard setups where it isn't, the only conclusion I can reach is that the "veil" is not an inherent characteristic of the headphone, but a characteristic of the entire setup.

I agree here. It sounds great from the Blockhead also. There's something about these headphones which disturb me otherwise on other amps.

 

[Solude]

Originally posted by Hirsch

"Hazy, fogged and muffled" is how I'd use the term, but the HD-600 ain't it.

For me it is. I think the distinction comes from listening levels. Much like an NHT speaker is pure garbage at low volumes so is the HD600. You can play the drive argument all day long but at the end of the day a frequency response graph shows clearly that the Senn is recessed up top. Until you bring that top to intelligable levels, it's vieled in that I can't make out what being said over the bottom end. Bring the volume up, what you refer to as drive, and the same response is more pleasant since the vocals and cymbal work are up to intelligable levels and the bloated bottom provides lots of impact and warmth.

I'm pretty sure the camp is split between listening levels, which can either help the Senn or hurt it.

I suspect the split is really about who's heard the HD-600 pushed to what it can do, and those whose equipment isn't giving it what it needs.

Why would I want to spend a small fortune getting equipment to bring the Senn to a good level when other headphones get me there for substancially less? I used to belong to the group that throws money at a problem to fix this and that but no more. Learned long ago that there are lots of bargains in the audio industry, you just need to find them.

For me right now its the M-Audio Revo and Beyer DT880. The Revo beat out my Music Hall CD25, beat out my Maxed Out Meta42 and costs what ~$100US? The Beyer is also hand over fist better than either my Senn HD600 or Grado SR325 for less.

So you tell me why would I go from a ~$320US system price to the Senn(~$240), Cardas(~$150), Insert Tube Amp Here (~$360+), Latest and Greatest Source (~$400+) to get to the same point? For bragging rights? No offense but my peer group stopped giving props for money pissed away needlessly on audio long ago.

Ah crap looks like its going to be another, Solude mad at the world day

 

[elnero]

Quote:

Originally posted by Solude Ah crap looks like its going to be another, Solude mad at the world day

LOL, what a great way to end a good rant.

 

[PeterR]

Quote:

but at the end of the day a frequency response graph shows clearly that the Senn is recessed up top

The subject of headphone frequency response is a little more complicated than with speakers. To achieve a response that sounds balanced, the actual response of the headphones will have to be anything but flat, as you're essentially bypassing your HRTF. To add insult to injury, everybody's got a different head/ear/etc. shape, so a given response won't be perfect for everybody (or is that anybody

). What can be said, however, is that the Senns response is recessed on top *relative to* many other headphones (as headroom's curves show). This could as well mean that Sennheiser's right and Grado's wrong...

 

[markl]

Quote:

Listen to the HD-600 using an amp that can feed them, and you'll hear a lot of things, but a veil isn't one of them.

Well, my experience wasn't exhaustive and I never had Hirsch's amazing collection of amps and tubes to play with, but I did use the HD600 with the old version of the Headroom MOH, earmax Pro, Berning MicroZOTL, and Melos maestro, but none at the same time so I could directly A/B. Yet no matter which amp I tried them with, I always found the perspective to be somewhat distant, I think this is an inherent characteristic of the headphone. Some people like to be many rows back from the performance, I've found I enjoy a more close-up view, and I also seem to prefer closed cans which keep more sound from escaping into the open air. Still, I do think the HD600s are excellent headphones and I was happy with them for a long while (I had the 580s for years), and I only became aware of the "veil" after trying the Sony CD3000 (and later R10 and AT W2002), which certainly can be argued (and has by some) is too "bright" and "aggressive". Different strokes for different folks! That's why we have more than one pair of cans on the market!

Mark

 

[acs236]

Quote:

Originally posted by Steve999 To my ears, a simple adjustment of -2 or -3 db at 480 hz takes the HD580s from a little laid back to astonishingly balanced and beautifully neutral.

Dare I dig out my old audiosource equalizer and try this?

 

[Solude]

Quote:

Originally posted by PeterR To add insult to injury, everybody's got a different head/ear/etc. shape, so a given response won't be perfect for everybody (or is that anybody ).

Actually it will. Regardless of your ear or hearing loss what you recognise as a guitar for example will be a certain sound. If the headphone reproduces that sound perfectly then it will match what you recognise as a guitar.

I.e. your definition was made based on 'your' ear. If a transducer reproduces the true sound of a guitar then your ear will hear the same thing since it goes through the same imperfect ear. Think your eye works the same way as the guy beside you? No, but you both have a reference for what colours are what and levels of light. All different but all able to interpret the same thing the same way.

If two people listen to a guitarist play 'Little Wing' for instance in person, then imediately listen to that recording through the same headphone at the same level as the live event the two people will comparitively have the same comments. They both heard completely different things but in comparison with the original that also was filtered by each persons ear the differences will be the same.

The problem is a good number of audiophiles aren't musicians and really have no direct reference of what is real. You can argue it either way but really if you don't have first hand experience as to what an instrument sounds like then how can you judge its reproduction. Listening live does not count, since it is also a reproduction made through less than stellar products in less than adequate venues. Well thats not true, if you ever went to an acoustic show where people stood quietly and you sat on stage then you might have a decent idea

 

[acs236]

Quote:

Originally posted by Solude I'm pretty sure the camp is split between listening levels, which can either help the Senn or hurt it.

I really don't think so. I hear the same sonic characteristics at what I would consider low, moderate and slightly high volumes.

 

[tanfenton]

Please, everyone, try confining your comments to your own experiences.

NGF

 

[Solude]

Quote:

Originally posted by PeterR The subject of headphone frequency response is a little more complicated than with speakers. To achieve a response that sounds balanced, the actual response of the headphones will have to be anything but flat, as you're essentially bypassing your HRTF.

Really picking on you, sorry about this

Actually the design of a headphone is much simpler. So many of the design questions are controlable. There is no room, there is no placement, just whatever structure you chose with a set distance. No variables to worry about. Just make a transducer that reproduces music faithfully in your chosen enclosure and distance from ear and you're done. Since your reference is the original, if the phone is faithful for one person, it'll be faithfull for everyone.

So whether you agree with me or not we both heard the same thing comparitively out of the Senn, you enjoyed it while I found it to be not faithful to the original. When I get together for jam sessions it doesn't sound anywhere near the Senn sound. Grado was closer, Beyer nailed it.