[richpjr]

Brian,

I just checked the Stefan Arts web site and they are listing all 3 of the cables I mentioned. The Vision 1 sells for $69-$79 (depending on the length), the Nightpath for $59-$69, and the Equinox for $109. One kind of interesting thing is that the Equinox for the 600 sells for $189. Looking at the description, the 600 version is described as a 4 conductor cable while the 590 version as a 3 conductor cable. How significant is that? Is that why it is more expensive or is it because of the split cable at the end vs. the single connector on the 590s?

As to my very quick initial impression - no I don't think they sound too bright at all. I burned them in for about 45 hours before listening to them and I am quite pleased with the detailed, punchy sound. They are head and shoulders better than anything else I have.

I really have not had a chance to test them for very long, but I did notice a hefty difference between the output of my NJB3 and my Pioneer Elite receiver, as one would expect. That has just reinforced my thought that I need an amp (since the Pioneer is in a different room from where I will be primarily using the NJB3) even for the 590s.

Rich

 

[bifcake]

Quote:

Originally posted by bkelly Bifcake, First off, let me ask you a question, have you owned both headphones or listened to them extensively at home or did you make up your mind from a store demo? Once again I will say that the I have listened to both headphones through the Melos and the amp help the 600's much more than the 590 's but not enough for me to feel like the 600's are better than the 590's. Thanks Brian

Brian,

I must confess that I heard the two at a demo. I didn't dislike the 590's. You're right about the mood, but I COMPLETELY disagree with you about timbre matching. Guitars sound like guitars on the 600's, not the 590's. Same goes for the drums.

 

[bkelly]

Bifcake,

In search of the truth lets take this one step further; do yu know headphone amplifier you were listening to them with?

I may soon start running guitars, pianos and drums through these phones at a local studio just to see just which one colors the timbre more. Stay tuned

Here is an interesting point to consider; I don't have an accurate survey but I think the most popular headphones here in Nashville with professionals are the Grados' The local supplier here that supplies these to most of the studios and is a dealer for both refers to the Sennheisers as "old school". At the time he said that (actually an employee not the owner) he didn't differentiate between the 590's and 600's.

Your turn.

 

[fyrfytrhoges]

this thread is an example of what makes these forums great... opinions are like a**holes, we all have one, and as I can tell from reading the reply's, no one quite agrees. I own the senn 590's now and enjoy them alot, but just today ordered some 600's so hopefully in a week or so I'll add another a**hole, I mean opinion of my own.

 

[bifcake]

Quote:

Originally posted by bkelly Bifcake, In search of the truth lets take this one step further; do yu know headphone amplifier you were listening to them with? Here is an interesting point to consider; I don't have an accurate survey but I think the most popular headphones here in Nashville with professionals are the Grados' Your turn.

Brian,

I heard the headphones using the headroom Max and Max monoblock amplifiers (the top of the line headroom products). Krell CD player was the source.

Re: Grados, I haven't heard them, so I can't comment. Besides, I never cross the Mason-Dixon line, so I take everything that's said "south of the border" in Nashville with a grain of salt.

 

[slindeman]

I listened to the HD590 for some time at the Headroom show, powered by a Headroom Home amp. My impression was that it sounded remarkably similar to the HD570 that I have owned for some time, with slightly better details but all of the same weaknesses that the HD570 suffers from, namely: Hollow sound (recessed midrange), exaggerated bass, and emphasized treble. I A/B'd the HD590s with the HD580 or HD600 (can't remember which) and it was very obvious that the HD590 has the same sound signature as my HD570, which I have also A/B'd with HD600 many times. While the bass extension below 80 hz is better than the HD600, overall the bass is way too boomy in reference to the rest of the frequency spectrum. I strongly agree with bifcake that instruments sound much more accurate on the HD600 than the HD590.

In this price range ($200 and under) without an amp I think the Grado SR-225 are clearly superior to the Sennheiser HD590, but there is the comfort factor and by gosh the Sennheisers are very comfortable. Once you add an amp, even a $40 DIY job like I have laying around, the HD580 has very little competition in this price range.

I didn't find the HD590 unbearably bright as some have remarked, especially compared to the Sony MDR-CD3000 or Beyerynamic DT-831 which are unbearably bright. I could live with the HD590, but I can't imagine paying more than $100 for them. If I owned them I would probably use them for the same thing I use my HD570 for now: gaming and tv/movies. The extra bass is just fine for games and tv, and the comfort factor is a huge bonus for long hours of use.

 

[Driftwood]

HD-600 + headphone amp.

Really it is no contest.
at $250 or thereabouts, the HD-600 is one incredible bargain.

Driftwood

 

[bkelly]

Rich,

Please fill out your member profile. It would be helpful to know what you listen to and the equipment you use.

I'm a jazz musician and of course I listen to that mostly but the other 50% of my time I listen to Rock and Classical music. Which brings me to a point. Often it is stated that due to the 600's more laidback sound they are more suitabe, for classical music while the 590's are more suitable for overly aggressive rock music. However, I couldn't agreeless. The more detailed and dynamic sounding 590's really make classical music came to life. I have heard so much more detail on Classical music CD's I have with these phones that aI recently thought a favorite reording of mine sounded more like a completely different recording. There was so much more air and sense of space and detail that you could tell exactly were the mikes were positioned (overhead). On aggressive rock music the 600's are subtle enough to kind of back you out of the performance environment enough so that you can kind of take a look at what is happening sonically. This is a nice feature and is the one I think fans of this headphone really appreciate. Unfortunately when you mix in the damped downed dynamics, the rolled off top end and the toy sounding bass it wears a little thin on my listening tastes. Others may accept these differences more readily.

I also maintain that the 600's change the timbre and color of instruments while the 590's do not. Also, if you do not know it yet you will soon find out that the 590's are quite a bit more efficient than the 600's. In other words it takes more power to make the drivers in the 600's (older technology) react than it does the 590's (newer technology). You don't need a physics degree to figure out what is going on here (heavy and slow as opposed to light and fast).

Look around, ever notice that this is the only website where you will find a running batlle going on between fans of the 590's and fans of the 600's. I think the reason is obvious and that is because Headroom has much more of a presence at Head-Fi. I'm not saying that there is anything really ominous or underhanded about this it's just that the criticisms of the 590's are more the viewpoint of Headroom than they are a fact.

I should say here that I have no real ax to grind with Tyll or Headroom. I have been a customer of theirs in the past and hopefully I will be in the future. However, websites like this should be a forum for ferreting out the truth about competing products and I think it would have been more truthful early on for Tyll to admit that most of his amp offerings were designed with the 600's in mind and for that reason the 590's do not flatter his equipment. Nothing wrong with that and the truth of it is there is absolutely nothing really wrong with the 590's, either!

You've listened to the 590's now, do you or anyone out there for that matter, (even if you prefer the 600's) really believe they are "mistakes" as Tyll has suggesteed. I didn't think so.

Enough said. At least for awhile. I'm off to find a way to plug my guitar in directly to my headphones to compare them.

 

[The Quality Guru]

Quote:

Originally posted by bkelly Rich, Also, if you do not know it yet you will soon find out that the 590's are quite a bit more efficient than the 600's. In other words it takes more power to make the drivers in the 600's (older technology) react than it does the 590's (newer technology). You don't need a physics degree to figure out what is going on here (heavy and slow as opposed to light and fast).

bkelly,

Please do not over-generalize and claim that higher impedence headphones are of older technology and are thus inferior as you seem to imply. Sennheiser intended to make their headphone, the HD600, 300 ohms due to the fact that it was designed for audio aficionados with high-end headamps and high end equipment. To put it simply, the HD600's are designed for headphone amplifiers, whereas the HD590's are not necessarily.


Quote:

You've listened to the 590's now, do you or anyone out there for that matter, (even if you prefer the 600's) really believe they are "mistakes" as Tyll has suggesteed. I didn't think so.

I compared the HD590 and HD600 through a Grado RA-1 + Marantz CD6000 OSE and realized that the HD590's were not really as tonally accurate, or as neutral as the HD590, in my opinion. Next to the W100, they seem inferior. The HD590 are lively, no doubt, but they have some problems. I don't know if I can call them " a mistake" per se, but they are not as good as the HD600- especially when the HD600 is with a good amp.

 

[bkelly]

Bifcake,

You are very wise to take everything you hear in Nashville "with a grain of salt".

However, the fact that you auditioned the 590's through the Headrom amps is the strongest support yet for what I have been saying all along. If you listen to them side by side through the Melos which is neither impedance sensitive or designed with the 600's in mind you will hear what I hear.

To slindeman,

Really! Another Headroom amp. Support for my argument just keeps mounting.

Seriously, you don't suppose that the boomy bass you experienced was the result of designing the Headroom amps to accentuate the weak bottom end on the 600's. As far as bright goes when you plug the 590 into an amp that was designed to accentuate the rolled off top end of the 600's what might be the result if the 590's top end was, as I suspect, more correct. Even from here I can see lights are going off!
I won't argue about the 225' Grados I have heard them but never side by side with the 590's. I suspect that they are really very close and I wouldn't be totally surprised to find out that I liked the Grados better. They are "lively" like the 590's but a little more relaxed at the same time. They also don't need an amp either to enhance them. You listening to this Rich?

To fyrfytrhodges,

Your comments are welcomed.

To slindeman,

I have never heard anything like a "hollow" sound out of the 590's. I would have listed the 590's forward sounding midrange as probably its biggest weakness. Hollowness is usually a sign of phase problems in equipment that I am aware of and I just don't hear it in the 590's. I am becoming more and more convinced that the real problem with the 590's is the associated amplifiers. Same thing happend in the early days of digital recording. Everyone used the same mikes they had used in analog recording but those mikes recorded on a curve that enhanced the rolled off top and bottom end you get with anolog tape and the result was that the earlist CD's had several problems but one of the biggest was that the top end was through the roof because of the analog specific mikes used for recording it.

I also would like to hear from anyone who has a pair of 590's and an all tube amp becasue that is the ideal match to me.

Talk soon.



Thanks
Brian

 

[bkelly]

To The Quality Guru,

You missed my point. I did not say higher impedance was older technology and my point is simply this: The Melos amp is well known for not favopring one headphone over the other, particularly based on the phones impedance.

Your second comment is a bit confusing but if there is another phone you like better I thinks that's fine. In my opinion the 590's are the best i've owned so far. Including the 600's sitting right next to them. I will grant that another person may favor the 600's. Everyone values different features differently and it seems likely that some one else may add these pluses or minuses up to have the 600 come out the winner. Make no mistake, I like the 600's myself. I was thinking of selling them but now that I have listened to them extensively I may keep them. I just cannot see them as somehow inferior to the 600's. No way!

 

[Taphil]

Quote:

Originally posted by bkelly The META 42 must be the answer for the HD600's because you are now the third person to suggest that this is a near ideal pairing for them. Do you have one of these DIY amps?

I have a Tangent-built META42 , 9V, AD845 op-amp. Truly amazing.


Quote:

The biggest differnce between the two headphones (and the more I listen to them the more I like both of them for different reasons) is that the 590's get the timbre of the instruments more correct. That is to say that guitars sound like guitars, drums sound like drums and basses sound more like basses. Since you own both headphones and seem pretty objective about them I would appreciate your thoughts on that using your epuipment.

I think the opposite. The 600 is substantially more natural AND neutral sounding. Instruments sound like what they're supposed to. With the 590, it sounds like someone applied some wacky EQ setting to make the bass bigger and highs brighter. IMO, the 590 is undoubtedly bright, and with that brightness comes increased clarity. It's like the clarity doesn't come fro free. This produces a very active and aggressive sound that's different and doesn't have to be inferior. The 600's, on the ohter hand, have a high level of clarity without the brightness. I prefer the 600's most of the time, though I can't say for sure which one is truly better.

As for the bass, I absolutely prefer the 600's. On the 590, the bass is smooth and nice, although a bit bloated. But on the 600, the bass is very defined and dynamic, and overall, while it's not boomy, it has a better presense in the music. Like in a particular song, the bass will just be a smooth blend of tones with the 590's because it's all smeared together, but with the 600's, I can hear every pluck of the bass string because it's much more detailed.

Quote:

Also, do you have aftermarket cabling on yours or are they both stock.

Nope, I have stock cables on both. I have no $ left, and I'm skeptical about cables, especially on my decent but not-the-best sources.

As for the "hollowness", I completely understand. Sometimes, the 590 just sounds out of place, because there's so much bass and trebble that there's nothing in the middle, so music sounds empty, lifeless, dead, withdrawn, drowsy, etc. On the 600, most of my music (rock, alt, metal, jazz, oldies) sounds fuller, although a bit laid back. But on a few other CD's, it's the other way around, and the 600 sound hollow. For example, the other day I was listening to U2 The Best Of 1980-90, and I didn't like how the 590's sounded (too bright, unnatural), so I used the 600's. Then I played Third Eye Blind's first album, and the 600's sounded completely dead, and yet the music became much more lively with the 590's.

BTW, it's hard to understand the 590 vs. 580/600 comparison without first-hand experience and spending a lot time listening. If I never got the 600's, I would have never known the good and bad aspects of the 590's and would have been perfectly content with them.

Overall, I think both are very different headphones, and comparing the 590 to 600's is like comparing the 580/600 to Grado's. They sound too different to be compared, so that it really just depends on personal preference. In the end, I don't love the 600's enough to get rid of my 590's, and I need the 600's to listen to music where the 590's are flawed.

Oh, and for comfort, the 590 is absolutely the best. The cord is only on one side, and it feels so much ligher on your head than the 600.

 

[LTUCCI1924]

Taphil
HI: I whent to the tangent web site and could not find the metal-42 amp. Could you tell me where you got the metal 42?

 

[fiddler]

LTUCCI1924,
Here's some info on the META42.

 

[LTUCCI1924]

fiddler
HI: where can I get the met-42. JMT is real bussy.