đŸ”¶ Sennheiser HD650

Headphones [Official] Open Back
98

So right away, I am not an expert in how things work, I just listen to them and say what I hear, I am not too concerned on how things get to the result but the result itself. So there are likely others more apt to give you a better technical answer to this question

Well, it comes down to how convincing and realistic it can be, it can alter harmonic structure, add roll off, and screw with the time domain, mess with distortion characteristics, etc, but can you do that as convincingly as a real tube? That is the question. It’s most likely possible, but at least to my ears we haven’t really got there yet. When you compare a tube vst plugin, you are more trying to emulate the sound of a tube preamp into your solid state gear rather than trying to emulate actually being driven by a tube at least in this case, that’s 2 very different things. Actually being driven by a tube isn’t going to interact as similarly. It’s like if you compare a real guitar to a synthesized one via a plugin, they might sound similar but how actually close they sound will depend on how good of a plugin it is and how good of a listener you are, it can likely fool someone who is untrained but not someone who is an experienced listener, again it all depends on what level of quality and realism you actually demand. And that’s also a more limited example, since running actual music through something is much more demanding and exposing of flaws compared to running a single thing like a guitar into it

I don’t think anyone is claiming that, if they are, they really shouldn’t be

Also heavily affects time domain performance as well, which can be a massive factor in how tubes sound, at least from what I know. You also aren’t taking into account the fairly linear increasing distortion as you continue to push tubes harder, soft clipping that can occur when driving tubes hard, and the damping factor you get depending on the design of the output stage which can also affect things as well. And so on (again from what I know)

That’s going to be a big factor that you just won’t get by running either a tube pre or modeled pre into a solid state amp

That is correct, the studio plugins are more designed after replicating mic preamps or tube buffers for studio gear, which aren’t exactly what you want for playback and aren’t designed after typical playback gear

Yep. Also it’s moreso that just putting a bad preamp inbetween your chain will give you a lesser result, the chain is only as good as the weakest link, if you have to run everything through a crappy pre that’s not going to be the best for sound quality regardless of the tech the pre uses. And from my experience really good preamps aren’t cheap

Also to be clear, tube products can sound wildly different. Personally I have and have heard tube products that you would never be able to tell apart from a solid state, all depends on what the designer is going for. I really dislike that “tube sound” people describe, I prefer something that is more going for organic and realism rather than messy bloated warmth and body. You can have insanely fast, clean, extended, and detailed tube amps, or you can have a warm gooey mess. All depends on the quality of the product and the goal of the design

You also aren’t taking into account the quality of amplification, you might be able to replicate it’s signature, but you won’t be able to replicate it’s enhanced technical abilities depending on what amplifier you compare. You can’t really use a software plugin to improve the detail of your jds labs, nor improve other technical aspects either. Same goes for trying to replicate some aspects of a tube amp, depending on the amp of course

The reason the crack is highly suggested here is mainly because it helps address some of the weaknesses of the 6xx, by increasing stage width and spatiousness, adding more bass body and warmth without sacrificing clarity and speed too much, giving more macrodynamics while reasonably preserving microdynamics, still being decently detailed. Also further improves timbre as well. How it accomplishes that really isn’t something I’m personally concerned with, all that I care about is that it sounds good to my ears lol

If you boil things down, the question really becomes “can I use software to make one piece of hardware sound like another”, and it all depends and there isn’t a clear cut answer, but from my experience it’s typically no

Basically you can start to approach this question yourself by comparing running your tube pre into your amp, and compare that to just using the plugin, and compare your results. If that gives you the result you want, great, if it doesn’t, then try out something like a bhc+sb or if you can’t push for that try a darkvoice or little dot and see what happens

Tldr there’s more that goes into it than you think, I’m not exactly qualified to explain why, but it’s something you really need to experience for yourself and see how things turn out. One of those things that makes sense in theory, but fails/isn’t feasible in practice

Also one of the reasons why some feel the 6xx is better served by tube amps is because they are more voltage focused/oriented devices which will work better with higher impedance loads

Another problem with software processing is that when you process via software typically you have more signal deterioration from said processing compared to an actual tube amp, depending on the quality of the emulation and plugin, but I haven’t heard one good enough to fully avoid this detriment to my ears given that you are running pure music through it. If it was a single channel just pure guitar recording the effects are sometimes less noticeable. You have to realize that those tube effects are more for creative purposes than actually recreating a tube accurately, it’s there to give you another color pallet/option not really there to truly recreate the sound of a tube

I will mention @Polygonhell since he’s much more experienced with tube designs and how software audio processing works than I am

2 Likes
99

Thanks for taking the time!

There is no end of woo that one can find if one searches through audiophile land, and this was indeed something I saw someone say (albeit on a different site) such as people insisting that a magical puck placed in their room somehow transforms the sound. The cross-section between marketers that want to sell stuff, technology that few of the consumers actually understand, and consumers themselves who are prone to confirmation bias, marketing suggestibility, and the sunk cost fallacy has produced a perfect storm. I know that long ago I convinced myself that changing a cable and CD player made a difference, even though I knew deep down that it really didn’t. The last time I remember being in an audio boutique to hear amps and CD players, the salesman left me to listen to a couple of players, telling me that he was sure I would like the more expensive unit. Being young at the time, I told him I actually liked the other one, which he explained away as due to some ‘synergy’ between the amp and CD player. In reality, I was too shy to just admit that I did not hear a damned difference at all.

Where I part ways with the ‘objectivists’ is that I am certain that ‘a straight wire with gain’ and 0 coloration can sound worse, less life-like, less realistic, harsh, and pleasant on some recordings. It might admittedly have been the mastering, but I had a song by Mingus on CD and LP and listening to them back to back there was no contest - the CD sounded good, but sterile and artificial, while the LP, despite its flaws, felt alive, realistic, and as though the music was being played in the room. That is what I want to hear again. If tubes (of the right sort) would give that to me, or even if they would just make Charlie Patton listenable by softening/rounding off and covering up the aggressive static in the background of those recordings, it would be well worth it to me. But yeah, the only tubes I have heard sounded like solid states and had just as much, if not more, of that sterile, artificial character that bothered me on lesser gear. If it weren’t for lockdown, I would likely go into one of those audio boutique viper pits with some headphones just to have a listen for myself. Of course, the fact that this is not possible only makes me yearn all the more for the ability to be transported into a jazz club (rather than a recording studio.) And with my wife being locked inside with me, I really can’t just crank my speakers and subject her to loud music


100

It’s not really that simple, an FR graph doesn’t capture everything.
You can go look at actual FR measurements across the whole chain, and the only thing that has any real visible effect are the headphones, you literally can’t distinguish a -60dB SiNad amp for a -140dB SiNad amp because the distortion from the transducer (headphone) is orders of magnitude more and so they all look the same.
That doesn’t mean the amps or other components sound the same, just that the test doesn’t capture that difference.

On the 6?? in particular there are a number of things that using especially lower priced tube amps does. The impedance curve for the 6?? has big spikes at the upper end and lower end of the frequency response, so amps drive them differently in those areas, and with the generally higher impedance output of tube amps that is more noticeable, and generally results in a better balanced headphone in the case of the 6??.

They will add varying degrees of harmonic distortion, which will make the midrange sound richer, though not all tube amps do this to the same extent or even at all when you get to more expensive amps.
The third thing is they provide a different feel to the start and end of notes, and the way Macro and Micro detail is portrayed than most SS amps. There are other things they do which have to do with the sort of noise they do not introduce especially if they have a tube based rectifier.

Most of this outside the 2nd order harmonics and marginal FR changes are changes in the time domain, they are subtle, but they add up.

Tube emulators IME work well for scenarios like guitar amps (though lots of guitarists would disagree) where your after the macro effects, specifically lots of 2nd order harmonics and how tubes behave when the input is overdriven. I’ve never heard one that sounded like an actual good audio tube amp.

Now my unpopular opinion on tube amps, I’m all in on tubes, though I prefer the cleaner sounding ones, but they aren’t worth it at the budget end of the scale, just too many things work against them, and in the favor of SS amps. I think the BHC, SW51+, Haggerman Tuba, probably the Quicksilver, possibly the Felix Audio amps are where tubes start to make some sense.

Now lots of people like the Dark Voice and Little Dot Mk2, but to me they are really just novelty sounds, and not what tubes are about.

The circuits in tube amps are trivially simple, but that means they depend heavily on the quality of component and especially the power supply, coupling caps and if they use them the output transformers.

I understand the desire to want to hear what a tube amp does, but entry level amps don’t demonstrate that.

3 Likes
101

You can get something that sounds more realistic and convincing if you just move up to the next performance bracket, it doesn’t exactly matter what technology it takes to get there imo

A cd player can totally make a big difference, or not, depends on the setup and the quality of the player

Synergy is pretty important and so is preference, so yes some things just do or don’t sound good together despite differences in technical level. Now if you can hear/care about those differences depend on lots of things.

It just flat out doesn’t exist. You can’t escape coloration, so no such thing imo

Quick note on the differences between cd and lp, they can sound equally as good, but it all depends on your setup and the source material. Sometimes you find that the LP is mastered better than the cd, or that your vinyl setup outclasses your digital setup, all depends

If you get specific tube gear that is tuned to do that, it’s totally attainable. The bhc comes to mind in doing just that imo

It’s been the current trend in audio, that “hifi” bright clean and slightly dry tuning that emphasizes some technical performance over realism

Def worth doing

1 Like
102

Yes there is nothing like experience, even if you never get there, megabuck systems are worth hearing.
I can still only aspire to the first very high end systems I heard decades ago, and it’s never stopped me enjoying what I have.

1 Like
103

My advice is to not worry about tubes amps until after you’ve had plenty of time with the 6XX on the Element II. I own Crack and Tuba tube amps and I still prefer the 6XX on solid state. Though that’s mainly because my favorite tubes don’t tune the 6XX to my preferences.

Depending on the amp, you can get some subjective improvement using a tube preamp. Here’s a thread on the subject. They’re cheap, so it doesn’t hurt to try them out. But I wouldn’t bother unless you really think it might tweak the sound in the right direction after listening to the 6XX and element II

2 Likes
104

Hopefully you will not take my response as a criticism or attack, but instead as the opportunity to enter into healthy conversation and teach me something. I am, unfortunately, a philosophy professor by trade, and thus naively believe that explaining one’s position and hearing out arguments is not an attack or impolite, but an opportunity to learn. Like Socrates, I know that I do not know
 But how is one is one to learn what they don’t know if one is afraid to explain what they believe and thus be open to being corrected

I was not claiming that it could never make a difference, only that I could hear no difference between the models I had in front of me, and certainly not on the basis of remembering one to the next. I should have said, I suppose, that it did not sound any different to me under auditioning conditions and despite the fact that I was being ‘primed’ by the salesman
 the second time it happened!

Likewise, not saying that synergy could never be a thing (to the contrary, I suggested that this could well be precisely why particular tube amplifiers are recommended for the 6xx.) I am absolutely convinced that it was nonsense in that instance. It didn’t help (although I did not realize it at the time) that the salesman himself was quite conflicted such that he told me how the engineers in the back claimed that all functional amps sound the same. I told him I could certainly hear the difference, to which he said “I’m not so sure.” He also, however, mentioned that of course they don’t let those engineers out onto the sales floor, and that he still did give stuff a listen as well. But he wasn’t sure that there was a difference. Now I know he should have been more precise in order for his claim to make sense, as I sure as hell knew that my early teenage JVC sounded like utter crap in comparison to my later Harmon Kardon, etc. when powering the same speakers.

This is rather the important point, in the end. If I can’t hear the difference, then it really does not matter to me. My wife can taste wines and tell me the year and vintage. I can taste the difference between wines when I taste them side-by-side, and certainly enjoy some more than others, especially after a few glasses, but my palette is nowhere near as refined as hers. In that case, assuming I was buying a bottle of wine for myself, it would likely make very little difference to give me the absolute highest end stuff and if asked to compare it to wine I had another day, I’d likely have only a vague recollection, if any, that they were different. It could be that this is a similar case with respect to amplifiers, DACs and CD players, however


I am not so sure that this is true: If you mean that you cannot find uncoloured sound due to speakers and headphones, which all have measurable and substantial distortion, I don’t think anyone could disagree. If you mean that it is difficult to measure the fidelity of the signal due to there being more at play than simple frequency curves, sure. If you mean that everything including whether the wires were installed by a virgin under moonlight is humanly audible, I have my doubts, but I assume this is not your position :smiley: I am not sure, however, precisely what your position is, and most importantly what if any information you have that I lack.

Now, I know this may get me in trouble, but here goes (again, I am NOT trolling, and genuinely inviting you to correct me if I am wrong.) I had been convinced by the position that the audio salesman mentioned above was alluding to at the time, and which in its more precise form was stated by Peter Aczel as follows: “In controlled double-blind listening tests, no one has ever (yes, ever!) heard a difference between two amplifiers with high input impedance, low output impedance, flat response, low distortion, and low noise, when operated at precisely matched levels (±0.1 dB) and not clipped. Of course, the larger your room and the less efficient your speakers, the more watts you need to avoid clipping.”

NOTE: this absolutely does not mean everything sounds the same regardless - not enough power, clipping, terrible implementation and other flaws common in lower end gear certainly changes things. LPs will certainly sound different (and not just because of the master, although I admit that this is likely to have been a large part the root cause of my response to the Mingus tune I mentioned previously. Certain exotic typologies, (e.g. tubes) and even certain cables can sound different precisely because they are designed to do so and they do so in a manner that is measurable. Similar things could be said of certain CD players and DACs I assume.

So, it is my belief (and I am not aware of any evidence to the contrary) that there a point where any distortion and artifacts introduced by amps/dacs/cd players that are competently designed and designed for neutrality is far below the level of human perception such that, for all intents of purposes, there is no difference between the signal being put in and the signal coming out except for amplification of that signal.

Now, it might be that I missed something, that this has been debunked, etc. It might be that you and/or some other people are ‘super hearers’ in the same way that my wife is a ‘super taster’ when it comes to wines. But my question would be

(a) do you have any explanation or evidence for some factor that invalidates Aczel’s claim (e.g., something that, once the precise parameters above are met, is left out of account, but that is understood and measurable, although perhaps difficult to measure without specialized equipment that no audio reviewer would have access to?)

(b) if not, have/would be willing to undergo a double-blind test to test your hypothesis? And

(c) If not, then why not or why do you think such a test would be invalid.

Now, I know that even mentioning (b) is enough to get people banned on some forums, and I am not sure how it will be taken here. I cannot help but feel, however, that there would be no need to ban people who asked this question if it were not that deep down, people suspect that they have fooled themselves as I believe that I also fooled myself in the past. Note, I may be entirely wrong even in my own case, as there might have been some difference that was audible to others but which I didn’t hear, or worse I might have fooled myself in the opposite direction due to buyers remorse/anxiety. But here is the thing - I love music and love when it is beautifully reproduced. I also, of course, like shiny new toys. What I don’t like is people being put off this hobby and the sheer joy that comes from listening to music by (a) fraud and (b) the inability to admit that we might have been defrauded, thus leaving a cloud over the entire industry. Granted, maybe it is just that people feel the double-blind argument has been driven into the ground and that it serves only to harm the community. My worry, however, would be that if I am this confused and skeptical, then being unwilling to subject ourselves to questions does far more harm to the thing we cherish and want to share

That said, I think the objectivists are wrong about one major thing: I don’t believe that perfect fidelity to the source signal is the be-all-end-all, especially when we are talking about recordings that (a) were mastered with technologies that would have introduced sound coloration, as then the audio engineer, even ideally (i.e., assuming that they were good at mixing, etc.,) would be ‘correcting’ the sound in a way that would not sound natural when reproduced with our ‘higher fidelity’ sources, (b) regardless, were mastered with particular speakers/headphones and thus with a tonal balance that might not accord with the sources used to reproduce it, and (c) when the music was recorded not in a live venue, but instead individual instruments recorded in either a room that is either basically dampened to lifelessness, or has reflective surfaces that introduce weird time delays, then mixed by an engineer, sometimes badly, to give the illusion that it is being played on a stage.

TLDR:
At the end of the day, as far as I understand it, there are two major bottlenecks to producing genuinely lifelike sound - our speakers/headphones and the recording. Because of flaws at one, or more likely both, ends, it is sometimes useful to produce some alteration of sound in the middle in order to correct for both of these issues. If a specific tube amp would do that for me and give me the sense of realism and naturalness that I find missing in some of my favourite albums, count me in. Measuring ‘perfectly’ could mean sounding terribly.

105

Nah don’t worry about it, my posts were more to comment rather than start debate as well

That’s a pretty weird conflict to have selling hifi lol

Yeah absolutely, these differences become much more significant and sizable for those who are super invested into it, it will be worthwhile to some and not to others

I’m moreso saying that anyone claiming “uncolored” or “wire with gain” or things like that is just pure marketing and salesman talk, everything in the chain makes a difference to some extent, but some things in the chain matter much much more than others lol

To me that more shows a flawed methodology more than anything, but to each their own, this isn’t the right place to really discuss that lol (since this still is in the 650 thread). If you feel that is true, no problem, personally I disagree but you sure as hell won’t get in trouble for that lol

Keep in mind a massive amount of things are measurable in audio, but we are still very far off from finding what actually matters in those measurements and if those measurements truly correlate to anything. Personally I don’t think many of the current measurements provide anything worthwhile after a certain extent with electronics (basically as long as it doesn’t measure like dogshit, it’s not going to tell you anything after that about how it will sound, again though this is my opinion with electronics). Imo people should be incorporating more psychological sciences, as it is equally important since this whole ordeal involves the brain and human perception

In measurements sure, in person no imo

No, because I am personally not interested in that claim since it’s been a different experience for me, I’m just here to enjoy the ride and find what works best for me, trying to create tests and constantly fight about what’s right and wrong in this hobby will just make it a miserable place to be, and you will end up being more misguided before you started lol. But again that’s just my thoughts, make sure to take them as just that. I’m not here to tell you how to live your live, and vice versa. Some end up biasing themselves more trying to look into things rather than just using their own hearing and experiences, as in the end, that’s really all that matters, is what sounds the best to you. If things were as straightforward as described in some of these claims/tests, we wouldn’t have to be having this conversation as there wouldn’t be this much disagreement in this hobby lol

Sure, I level match and double blind myself fairly often for my own personal reasons. The difference is that I do very extended double blind tests, typically spending days with the components and taking notes, then swapping to device b, still unknowing which are which (I have someone else help me with this of course). Personally I think the biggest flaw with the current blind test methods are quick switching and things of that sort, as you really need very extended time to actually hear things and you just won’t get that if you constantly switch back and forth every minute or whatnot (exactly because it’s your brain, it’s not capable of parsing such rapid changes)

Just with disagreement at least from me, if you were being an asshole about it it could lead to a ban but you clearly aren’t so no problems here lol

So far, typically the people that go about that path try and shove it down people’s throats and act like a know it all, hence why they get banned on other platforms. For most reasonable platforms, asking something like this isn’t going to lead to a ban unless things get totally out of hand (or you have a platform that is highly biased one way or another)

The hobby is pretty much 50% music, 50% gear lol, if you don’t have one or the other, the enjoyment drops off a cliff lol

Honestly I see the most put off by the hobby by a few things: 1, the overwhelming amount of conflicting information and opinions that some struggle to sort though, 2, the no real clear path on how to approach things and the realization that something that works for one person might not work for another and that there is no real “correct” solution. And 3 that constantly moving up the ladder (or also constantly moving to the side) can be draining and finding a balance is difficult. But people will continue to learn and figure out things for themselves with time and experience

For sure. This hobby is about enjoyment. If you enjoy creating a system that portraits what you want to listen to in a specific way go for it, if you want something that aims to be as close to the source, go for it. If you want something that tries to be as realistic as possible, go for it, etc. I mean it’s somewhat unreasonable to try and objectify a hobby that is subjective at nature isn’t it.

It’s like trying to get “what the artist intended” which is also a bunch of nonsense

Pretty much. Studio gear is designed to add coloration 99% of the time, but it’s there because it’s considered desirable. It’s also recorded or mixed for the main audience, and most of the time that’s not going to be an audio enthusiast, so typically compromises are made that make it sound more enjoyable on lower end consumer systems that hurt fidelity for higher end setups, it’s a compromise. It’s also a waste to try and make studio albums sound super realistic in the traditional sense because it wasn’t recorded or produced in a realistic way in the first place lol. That doesn’t mean you can’t make them sound damn good though

I would personally extend that to the entire chain in the end, since again the chain is only as good as the weakest link, source gear can be just as important as the actual transducer (when you get to a very high level), as if one part of your chain can’t convey one aspect, the rest of the system won’t be able to either.

Yep yep def agree with that

Also for now, if we want to continue this discussion further, let’s do it in PM’s to not take this thread about the hd650 off track anymore lol

1 Like
106

And that assumption is the crux of the issue.
I’m not going to argue with you that amps and DAC’s sound different even those with measurably inaudible distortion and flat frequency response, but IME they simply do.
If you disagree go ahead and proceed based on that assumption, things are a lot cheaper that way.

Measurements are simply incomplete for amps and DAC’s, even if you go beyond the woefully inadequate set of measurements made by sites like ASR.

3 Likes
107

Appreciate the response! As MON suggested, I’ll end here as not to derail the thread (perhaps this convo could be placed in a different forum by the mods?) and PM you.

108

image
image4032×3024 2.64 MB

After a half month’s wait, finally, my 6XX’s arrived two days ago, and I’ma nuttin’. This isn’t my first rodeo on the Open Back world, but I returned the X2HR out of discomfort (before Dekoni ever released their Choice Series).

I must say, these play my tracklist very well. I was told these are some pretty warm cans, and warm indeed.

Music I listened to:

2 Likes
109

Sold my 600’s
After a few months I bought a set of the 650’s
had to see if they were really any better or different.

The 650’s are my low end /low cost gold standard for all things headphone related.

Having the TOTL cans, amps and dac, yes these are not at that level, but for the cost and design they are absolutely superb


The other day I put them on and connected to a Schiit Jot1 (and I have a jot 2) with the SE jack and low gain
played some random low pedal organ music and was floored at the bass (bass extension) that these 650s presented
yes maybe not the most accurate etc but the freq response was indeed very very good do these dynamic drivers


Alex

110

Hey All,
My 6XX finally arrived yesterday (actually, the deliverer wouldn’t drop them off as I owed import fees and so I had to walk for to the post office— Totally worth it!) Having lived with the peakiness of my AKG K701 cans for the last few months, I was forever playing with eq to make them listenable, and found them incredibly fatiguing, especially with older material. These are far more relaxed and forgiving - just smooth like butter in comparison. Not as (artificially) wide, which I suspect is down to the weird tuning of the AKG, but that always led to far too much stereo separation and was especially disorienting on older tracks. Even my wife, who tolerates this hobby but has 0 interest, was impressed when she put them on, and similarly noted how much more pleasing they sound! Well worth the drop price, for sure. I’ve tried EQ (crinkle, etc.) as well, but actually prefer their out of the box tuning, which is just fun and brings a nice mid -forwardness and roundness to the sound.
Now to hear how I need bottlehead, lol!

2 Likes
111

Out of curiosity, how are these headphones considered neutral? To me, they are like sitting down at a nice, warm fire in a wood cabin - cozy, not overly spacious by any stretch, rolled off treble that is still accurate, but a definite mid bump and 0 harshness
 I can get why some people would find them less immediately exciting, and even call them veiled, but damn. They kinda sneak up on me and, before I know it, I’m several songs in, just grooving - or at least that is my experience

I wouldn’t want them to be my only cans, but pour me a scotch after a hard day, throw these on, and I can just melt into the couch without a care in the goddamned world. Anyone have similar experiences?
Or are you thinking, 'Oh, wait until you hear x, ‘cus I had that experience and then heard
’?
Or, ‘You are listening to them on JDS element II, but wait until
’?

2 Likes
112

If anyone’s interested I just did a big comparison post of the 6XX vs. the Sundara over at headphones.com: Sennheiser HD 6xx vs. Hifiman Sundara SHOWDOWN REVIEW - General Headphone Discussion - The HEADPHONE Community

3 Likes
113

Nice one, thanks for sharing. If u can, at some point try the HD6XX again on a good tube amp

1 Like
114

Which one would you recommend?

115

Ideally I would really skip the DarkVoice/Little Dot (only the budgetary, this brand has some high end tube amps) level of stuff and aim for something like the Bottlehead Crack with Speedball or sth equivalent (to name a few: Feliks Echo, Hagerman Tuba, Tor Audio Roger, Shortest Way SW51+), but I personally believe the Crack has the best synergy with the Senns at this price range

2 Likes
116

Truth.  

117

Thanks for the req, I’ll check it out!

1 Like