Former musician, teacher, some hi’s loss. Listen to orchestral and
female vocals (e.c. Barlow, Jacintha, etc.) Like natural timbre of Senns, but need wider s.stage and extension. Can’t decide. Any thoughts you folks have would be appreciated. Thanks.
1 Like
Hmmmm, are you willing to have something harsher than the sennheisers? Both of the sundara and 1990 will be better extended and wider, but also both will be a bit brighter and might not have as good of timbre. What sennheiser are you referring to btw?
1 Like
Yes, I like clarity and brightness doesnt bother me so thought 1990 but Sundara looks like better vocal mids. I have 4xx now but they have gotten too warm.
1 Like
So personally then I would point you towards the sundara, it’s going to be a fair bit more refined and also better extended, more neutral, and generally more proficient technicality wise
What amp are you using? And what do you mean by warm regarding the 4xx?
1 Like
Sorry, missed the second part of your reply. Friend loans me 558 and 58 x and i like their naturalness, but feel sonically claustrophobic!
1 Like
That makes sense, they aren’t the widest and most open headphones from my experience. I don’t think the sundara or 1990 have the timbre of the 58x, but I thing it’s still good and generally not an issues for me.
*to the 58x. The reason I didn’t suggest the 1990 was because I don’t think it sounds as natural because of the strange transitions between frequency ranges, and it’s a bit more forward than something natural
2 Likes
Jds atom. The 4xx is less forward in vocals and has a bit of extra reverb which can be nice but a bit exagerrated. Appreciate your help…
2 Likes
Gotcha, the sundara will be more forward in the midrange, and also be more accurate regarding the attack and decay. Also the atom should be just fine, if you wanted to perhaps upgrade, you could grab a schiit asgard 3 if you wanted to
3 Likes
Thank you!! Spent 20 years with our area orchestra, also choral conducting,and combo work, so I know how instruments should sound. A blessing and a curse. Ha. Thanks again, MON
3 Likes
Hopefully it works out for you, I feel you on knowing what things should sound like being both good and bad, makes things hard lol
1 Like
Thanks again. Have a good night and stay healthy!
4 Likes
The reason I didn’t suggest the 1990 was because I don’t think it sounds as natural because of the strange transitions between frequency ranges
@M0N, as someone looking into the 1990s as a headphone upgrade (currently using 4xx’s and 770/990 250 Ohms, and enjoying the 990s / 4xx’s a lot), I’m slightly concerned hearing you say that. Can you elaborate at all?
1 Like
So in your case I think if you enjoy the 990 and 4xx, the 1990 makes some sense for you, neither the 990 nor 4xx sound as natural as the 58x, but they aren’t going for that. The 1990 is tuned for a bit more studio sound, so it will be more forward than natural, also with slight and clear points where like the upper bass ends and the lower midrange starts, where on the 58x it’s more blended together. I would still suggest the 1990 for what you are looking for imo and also based on what you like. It’s an issue for some and not for others
3 Likes
Awesome. Thank you for elaborating!
1 Like
Sundaras got more treble than HD58Xs, huh?
(Tax money coming soon…)
“In the red corner, the best headphones under 1000$ according to a lot of people! In the blue corner, my treble sensitivity! Fight!” 
ive heard both and personally id got 1990 if you plan on eq’ing. sundara if youre set against eq
1 Like
Joshua Valor used the Analytical pads and some foam for the treble spike. But i think the Elex is great for that. They sound great, in my opinion the best headphones under a 1000$, and they have no treble issue. although they are not the most neutral headphones in the world. so not sure how natural they would sound. But nice soundstage
3 Likes