đŸ”¶ Sennheiser HD650

Their respective tonalities are pretty close on ~$100 solid state amps out there. The HD58X exhibits just a bit more sub-bass presence since it doesn’t roll-off as quick as the HD6XX and the treble of the HD58X has slightly more energy than the HD6XX but they’re pretty close. However, when it comes to technicalities, even on a Magni 3/Modi 3 Schiit stack, I could tell that the HD6XX outclassed the HD58X, e.g. with regards instrument separation during busy passages, especially for classical music, you can hear the instruments starting to glob together on the HD58X where the HD6XX keeps them much better delineated.

On tube amps, even on the relatively affordable Darkvoice 336SE (non-stock tubes), the HD6XX truly separates itself from the HD58X. The 150ohm impedance HD58X doesn’t do too well on OTL tube amps like the Darkvoice compared to the 300ohm impedance HD6XX, the latter just loves the voltage that OTL tube amps provide.

4 Likes

You should also consider where you plan to go with audio. The 6xx/650 scale up with higher quality amps and dacs ridiculously well. The 58x will top out relatively quickly. If you plan on going on an audio journey the 6xx can be a valuable companion because it will give a familiar reference point along the way. I recently reacquired a 6xx myself and it sounds really good on higher tier amps like Liquid Platinum, G111, or ZDT jr.

5 Likes

My 6XX with the HD600 head band/padding ($10 I think from Sennheiser directly) and Dekoni Suede pads ($50) with Hart Audio Cable.

I know that learning what you like is just part of the journey, but if I had been given these to start with I probably would have never gone down this audio rabbit hole to begin with lol. But hey, it’s not the destination, it’s the friends we made along the way!

5 Likes

Interesting. What made you put suede pads on them and what do they do to the sound?

I bought these along with the fenestrated sheepskin pads from Drop and used those for a long time, then switched back over to stock pads. I didn’t really think much of them until I got the suede Dekoni pads for the 177X GO and was really blown away at how comfortable they are as well as how much more they emphasize the bass.

So I looked to see if Dekoni made any for the 6XX and sure enough they did. I’ve been listening for a few hours now and I just find them to be way more comfortable and they also emphasize, to my ears, the bass and mid-bass frequencies more. Those always had to be EQ’d up a little bit for my tastes but now they don’t.

But comfort was definitely the motivation.

2 Likes

Really interesting. Thanks for the tip! :headphones:

1 Like

I got a pair of 58x that came with the Drop Hybrid and Drop Velour pads. Those Drop Velour are comfortable. Much better then stock pads and, maybe this is placebo or bias, but I think they improve the sound a bit. Sounds
cleaner. Having trouble articulating this. What did the Fenestrated Sheepskin do to the sound if you don’t mind me asking another question?

^ Here’s a visual comparison between the pads.

So I just did some A / B testing with them
 I prefer the sound of the sheepskin pads more. They’re comfortable but it’s weird
 it’s like the longer I wear them the less comfortable I feel they are. They start off kind of cold and then almost
 sticky. I constantly feel the need to shift them around a little bit.

The Dekoni are much more comfortable to me and markedly darker. Bass and mid-bass are much more emphasized but
 eh, now that I’m comparing them, not in a good way. What makes the 6XX special is their mids and the suede pads overemphasize the low end over the mids. I mean they’re still good, but the sound of the stock or fenestrated pads are better to me.

So it looks like for me it’s a trade-off of comfort vs. sound.

6 Likes

@Michael

Here: đŸ”¶ Focal Clear Mg - #54 by Michael

You mentioned you have 6xx, orignally plugged it directly into your PC, then got a Modius and Jot 2. I’m curious, what did you think of the performance increase of the 6xx with that Schiit stack?

While I certainly noticed a difference, I’m not by any means an experienced listener, so I’m not sure how to describe it. I can say that it’s a larger difference that going from balanced to single ended on the Jot2 since I have both RCA and XLR connections going from the Modius to the Jot2, but beyond that, I can’t say much.

I bought another set of HD6XX’s for an incoming tube amp. I owned these three years ago and ended up seliing them as they didn’t move me.

So now, as with the HD600’s, I will try again. This time with an OTL tube amp. We’ll see
 :grin:

1 Like

Can anyone recommend a 4.4mm balanced cable for my trusty HD650’s? The two criteria are that the 2 pin plugs fit snugly in the headphone itself and they are not microphonic. Thanks!

Dekoni makes one now actually. Though it’s not cheap :confused:

Hart Audio is more likely what you want.

1 Like

Hi All,
I’ve attempted to ask these questions in other forums, with little response, but now that I have ordered the 6XX from Drop, and I keep reading how much these headphones like tubes, I was wondering if the following would give me a taste of what people are talking about:
(1) I have a JDS Element II - would using a cheap tube ‘preamplifier’ like those sold by Fosi, nobsound, fxaudio, etc. and passing it through the element give me a good idea of what tubes would do for the 6xx?
(2) Has anyone tried using (or would any owners be willing to pretty-please try and compare) something like this to ‘real tubes’ and tell me if this would give me a decent idea of the sound off of something like a Little Dot II or Crack?:

(Wave Arts | Plugins | Tube Sat Vintage)

PS: this is a VST plugin and requires a host program. Having a Mac, I attempted to use MenuBus as it is free, but it is also out of date, and did not output sound to my usb for some reason. I found that SoundSource works very well, was made by the same person, and allows for system wide eq, etc. on Mac, and while it is $40, also has a trial that would allow fellow tinkerers to check it out:

No, it might give a bit more fullness and some roll off, with a bit more space but less accuracy to your element, potentially better timbre depending on the tube, but it’s not going to be all that similar to an actual tube amp driving them imo. Personally I’m not the biggest fan of adding one of the cheaper tube pre’s, as I don’t really feel they typically add worthwhile coloration and typically diminish technical performance, but they are cheap enough to grab one and try without having to worry about wasting too much money if you don’t like it (but there is added cost of trying out different tubes if you do that, but don’t throw too much money into tubes for a cheap pre)

That also sounds nothing like an actual tube amp, typically plugins like that add some enjoyable/desirable coloration for better richness and fullness, sometimes adding a bit of extra artificial space, but it doesn’t really accurately recreate the sound of driving something from a tube. Again also free to try and could be desirable depending on the person (and are pretty nice for actual studio work if you don’t have real tube gear on hand and want a specific sort of sound), but it’s moreso an eq with a bit more play in the time domain than it is running something through an actual tube.

The cheaper preamp will give you a more accurate sound of what driving it off a tube may sound like vs the plugin, but both are still somewhat far off, the pre and the vst are more adding coloration than emulating the driving characteristics imo

M0N, I am not surprised (although a bit saddened for my pocketbook) that this is the reality - but I can’t see why it would be impossible to produce the same sonic effect using software emulation. Any insights?
Just thinking out loud here, so please tell me if/where I am wrong, and know that I am not trolling, I just really want to understand: Unless one buys into literal magic and woo, it cannot be that a tube amplifier is ‘recovering’ lost information in the recording, only that tubes color the sound by rolling off frequencies and introduce second order harmonic distortion. Granted, it might be that the way in which tubes react to the load of the Sennheiser HE6xx etc. is such that it introduces it in ways/places that are pleasing and compliment/cover over the weaknesses of the headphones and the mix, or that the kind of distortion added gives one a better sense of space that appears to be lost in the antiseptic studio rooms where many original recordings were made and when, if one likes e.g. 60s Jazz, sound engineers would have been mastering using gear that would itself have had such sonic characteristics, and more importantly were mastering for people who would be listening to LPs. That said:
(a) I can understand that different tube amplifiers with different tubes will sound different, and so the specific character of distortion introduced by the above program might not accurately represent what something like a little dot or Crack would give
(b) Likewise, I can understand that the kind of coloration/saturation one might get from a preamplifier (especially a cheap one) might not be the same as one would get if driving from a proper tube amplifier, as opposed to hybrid, in part due to the weird ways that tubes react to different loads, in part because they produce more of the characteristic sound coloration when substantially amplifying a signal rather than just acting as little more than a potentiometer with minuscule gain.

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

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


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

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