Sennheiser HD650 - The classic beauty in a grey dress Appreciation thread!

rids57 said:
Really?

graphCompare.php
Click to expand...

As much as I take their graphs with a grain of salt this is exactly how I hear them both. I love how Sennheiser didn't feel the need to follow the trend with the 650 and boost the treble resulting in a natural, smooth effortless high in.
 
Last edited:
–]SleepieceHE400i // K7XX // K545 // IM50 1 point 22 minutes ago
+1 with /u/meringo. I've owned the 650 and found it to be slow and messy when it came to fast music like Post-Hardcore and Metal. It's the whole reason I just did away with the Senn line in the first place and sought planars. Never lacked any detail with the 400i either compared to 650.



This was from reddit....I use the 650 with fast music all the time because of how snappy it is. The only way I can make my 650 sound like this chap described is plug them into my laptop jack and listen to some terribly recorded music. The guy owns the HE-400i and K7XX which are a tier below the 650. The HE-400i while a good headphone isn't as resolving and quick as the HD650 but I don't know what he is running it off.

It still amazes me that people describe these headphones as slow, they are faster than most planars, I don't understand where all this planar speed myth comes from. Anyway regarding the 650 being dark, it has a gentle roll off and it's not really a dark headphone because when I run my reference recordings they still give me what was recorded. I'd say they are pretty accurate and just not boosted in the highs.

Someone coming from Grados, Hifimans, HD700 or AKG's would probably call them dark because they are used to the extreme rather than accurate or slightly rolled off treble.

I recently spoke to guy who already owned the HD650 and purchased and LCD-3. He wanted an upgrade and bought a top tier amp and DAC. He played the LCD-3 for months but for fun decided to give his old 650's a whirl on his new amps..his jaw dropped and couldn't believe his HD650 was the superior headphone.
 
Last edited:
Get out of my HD650 thread with that rubbish!

Just kidding! I owned them twice and really liked them but not anywhere near as good as the 650 the resolution difference is really apparent and the bass is quite distorted with a grainy upper end and a few harsh peaks but I still really like them! I thin they have one of the best responses out of the current closed backs I just wished Shure used better quality drivers given the price.

I used to use them on my commutes and everything because of how comfy the ear pads were.
 
NirK said:
You make the 1540 sound really bad there compared to the HD650. HD650 can sound slow and have no sub bass, the HD650 are really good for slow music etc, but anything fast or with deep bass they are not as good, they also have the "3 blob soundstage" which can be annoying. But yes overall the HD650 are very good, the 1540 are faster and have sub bass while not losing much in other areas, ideally you would want more than 1 pair of headphones, for example HD650 + 1540 or D2000/D5000 etc. I also found the 1540 a bit grainy when using Xonar STX as headphone amp, but using NAD D1050 they sound good.
Click to expand...


If you used the NAD 1050 with the 650 then I'm not surprised you think the 650 sound slow and narrow probably not resolving enough The 1050 like the D3003? (Pretty sure I've got the name wrong)is a good all round device but it's not a Peice of kit designed to run headphones like the 650, HD800 etc I have no idea about a 3 blob soundstage that sounds more like an under driven headphone. The 650 is very cohesive at least it is with most of the gear I've tried it on, my LCD-2 couldn't match the 650 in that area either.

I also have used the HD650 for competitive gaming and it gives me a perfectly round image. The sub bass is a personal thing but it's not the fault of the 650 it's a universal thing being dynamic and open. The 650 is one of the fastest headphones I've tried with the right gear, I recently bought another Little Dot MKIII to slow them down a little and give me that lush slow decay I like.

The 1540 can't pick up low level like the 650, LCD-2 it's very much in that mid range bracket IMO. The bass doesn't have good texture it's boom boom boom. I when I reviewed them my opinion was slightly different because my gear wasn't up to par but now I've tried more the 1540 hasn't really scaled with my experience.


I still think it's a good headphone and their best full sized headphone IMO but it's just too stuck in the mud at resolution to compete with the 650. I can personally send you a reference track and I will bet the house on it you won't hear this particular subtle cue with the 1540 due to its blurry background but with a 650 it will stand out like any other part of the song.

I think this whole slow thing needs to be put to bed with the 650 because it's been proven enough times that it's more resolving and faster then most of the stuff out there but people listen to the 650 on poorly matched equipment then spread this dark, slow nonsense. I'm not attacking you or downplaying you at all I'm just basically saying listen to them on something more suited then compare and sow would be the last thing on your mind.
 
Last edited:
Yeah I think it's hard to pick a big 3 I think there's too many headphones. The best headphone I've heard is probably the HE1000 for tone/resolution combined and Hifiman are usually a hit and miss IMO. I think it terms of consistently if I had to pick a big three it would be Sennhesiser, AKG, Beyer but in the future I could see Hifiman being in that mix. I just feel they need to figure out what type of sound signature they want to stick with then work on ironing out their QC issues.
 
I hear the 650 as going down to 30hz with good impact although it isnt't the most tight - so again I think it's about matching the right gear. I do Prefer the bass presentation from the LCD-2 and Nighthawks though and find bass the 650's weakest aspect. Open dynamic headphone generally have to bump up the distortion to give the bass a fuller presentation where as the Denon line have fairly low distortion figures.

Please Fostex, make a D7000 in carnate.
 
It is a nice device I just don't think the NAD's are resolving enough for demanding headphones. The 1540 are efficient and don't really scale like the 650 so it's a lot easier to get them to sound good.

NAD never gives away its power output I've been trying for ages to find figures I removed a member here Mrk owns the flagship which is a nice device and asked NAD about their power and the figures sounded off so It looked indentical to the Little Dot MKII which is weird for a solid state device so makes you wonder if the sales team even know. I'm glad you like the 1540 though with the 1050. I used to use my 1540 portability because those ear pads are just yummy, when I first bought them I used them for everything and made great gaming headphones.
 
I personally don't mind someone saying their headphone is better, if it was actually better lol.

To put it into perspective the 1540 is close to the Philips X2 in ability and actually is very similar sounding IMO. Measurements are good to get an idea, the low bass will be fairly accurate in Tylls measurements but like all measurements treble is the most difficult to get an idea on but things like treble roughness can be seen.

I heard the 1540 similar to the graph, a little missing in the low bass, mid bass hump, a bit U shaped and a rough treble. I think the 1540's curve is the most most ideal for a closed headphone.

I'd actually buy the 1540 again if I came across a good deal.
 
I find the Denon D2000 more neutral than the 1540, more linear but I agree the treble is rough on Biocellulose drivers in general. I don't think it's too bad(1540)it's not elevated but just unrefined. At high volumes the 1540 can be quite harsh. It does well at trying to hide it with it's mid bass hump but I def still notice it easily. If Shure keeps that tuning but uses better quality drivers they would be way more popular. The LCD-2's Rock and I'd still have them of their quality control wasn't so terrible. Not as good as the 650 IMO but better at bass by quite a lot.

I compared the HD650 to the Hifiman Edition X, LCD-3, HE1000 and a few others and while I felt they all did bass better, none had the tone, seduction and resolution as the HD650 part from the HE1000 in the resolution category but the amp and DACs used cost well over 2K so that type of performance cost some serious money - The 650 is the headphone Headfi want you to forget about lol

I can't remember how the 650 sounds on the Lyr but I'm sure it's very good. I love the Little Dot amps although they are not the most resolving, with the right tubes the paring is magical! Valhalla 2 is very good, a bit more sterile than the Chinese tube amps. Bottle head crack is always a good choice. I use Chord Mojo > LD MKIII with Mullards and it's a nice sounding chain :)
 
I think if they didn't have the extras they're prob be somewhere between £200-£300 which would be a good price for them. I def prefer them over the Denon models overall.

I'll prob own a pair again one day because they are great closed headphones.
 
Mine start to roll off gently are 40hz and I can hear them down to 30 and softly at 20 so technically they have plenty of sub bass extension for an open headphone. Almost every headphone has a bass roll off to some degree. A planar for example, has to have very large drivers to achieve down to the depths bass while closed headphones can achieve it just on design although it's still difficult to get right.

What the 650 does really well at is impact, it has good weight and slam to it's bass. It does have higher distortion like the HD800S to make the bass sound full but it's done correctly without sounding sloppy. I currently use the M8100 tube which has a nice full bass and fantastic mids, just wished the treble on the M8100 was as clean and articulate as the M8161.
 
When people have tried my setups the first they say is why is your HD650 so fast? I always say the same thing, because I match it right. It always comes down to the DAC...have a fast resolving dac and feed a decent amp to your 650's they will beat any planar not named HE1000, Abyss, LCD-4 in terms of speed and impact and resolution.



Yeah the HE-400 and LCD-2 has amazing sub bass, prob the best I've heard I just wish Audeze had less blurred backgrounds and better at resolving small details and most of all good QC. I do love the LCD-2's though but that price needs to come down a lot.
 
The HD650 doesn't really roll off bad it's more like a gentle slope rather than a deep dive. I think the markets plagued with boosted highs that headphones like the 650 get called dark when they are actually more natural IMHO.

The resolution I mention is like a high quality TV. It doesn't boost anything and it gives you everything you expect from a well made screen - think pixels. Headphones like the Beyerdynamic T1 for example are not particularly resolving and boost the treble and upper mids to appear more detailed, sharp..think a mid ranged TV trying to be high end at a ridiculous price - everything is sharper to appear like you are getting that extra detail when you are really getting an in your face presentation that stands out.

The 650 I get parts of the music that are missed in most headphones because they are high end quality drivers. With the LCD-2 I get good resolution and a slightly elevated treble but I don't get subtle cues like I would with the 650 because the LCD-2's driver is more veiled and less resolving and no amount of boosting will get me those subtle cues, I will just get the same but over sharpens.

The HD800 is basically a high quality amazing driver but it's also enhanced. I've got tracks on my computer that I know to to core and the 650 gives you everything in the recording while so many headphones will exaggerate or smooth over. One thing that has surprised me is how many recordings have a roll off in the treble. If any of you 650's want to do an experiment I can send you two tracks that are polar opposites and your 650(if your equipment is resolving because the 650 is s chemleon) Will sound harsh and bright on one and dull and slow on the other, that's accuracy.

Does that makes sense?
 
LCD's have always had a rough treble but it was lower in level but the newer LCD-2's have a treble elevation. I confirmed this on my reference tracks and found it to enhanced those ranges. It was pretty flat from bass to upper mids though kind of like the K612 pro but less brittle.

Yeah 800S are stunning, I'm going to give them a whirl soon when I make time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom