Sennheiser HD800S Review (Headphone)

[Cahudson42]

only have HE400i. Would that do?

Yes! A great start.. Sort of the 'cornerstone' of the HIFiman line. Magnet structure - single sided (facing outward side of diaphragm) . While others (Ananda, Arya, Deva/HE5XX) have magnets on both diaphragm sides - results in debates ad nauseum about sonic differences.

Here is the HFM 'evolution tree' - the rightmost branch are symmetric double-sided. The center, Asymmetric double sided, the leftmost - single (outward) sided:
https://hifiman.com/evo-fhp/tree.html#id_10

Add the debates on dynamic (voice coil) types like the HD800 vs. these HFM 'planar dynamic' - and 'tons of fun': is ahead

 

[Blake Klondike]

I created a new sticky thread for general complaints about headphone measurements. Please post your issues there: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...nt-thread-about-headphone-measurements.18451/

This is a surprisingly controversial thread-- You would think we were discussing politics or sports!

 

[YSC]

I created a new sticky thread for general complaints about headphone measurements. Please post your issues there: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...nt-thread-about-headphone-measurements.18451/

sounds nice, hope it could make it a hot debate and improvement place.

 

[jhaider]

It is the goal and no need to demand extra cost hardware where the capability exists for free in software. There is global EQ for Windows systems and that pie alone is massive. Software EQ basically turns a passive headphone into an active one allowing us to not only change their frequency response but impose a target curve which can be personal in nature.

The capability doesn't in fact exist free for most users.

Many of those Windows machines are locked down corporate boxes, so there's a huge swath of headphone users left out.

Also of course Mac and iDevice users, who are disproportionately represented in the demographic of consumers who might buy expensive headphones for listening to music (as opposed to to for gaming or other use cases).

Never mind that if you EQ in software, any other source then provides inferior sound quality. And you constantly have to mess with stupid software if you just want to go from listening to headphones to listening to speakers using the same source. No thanks! That's actually why I never bought the computer-based Dirac - the headache of messing with audio setting just to go fro speakers to headphones outweighed any potential benefits. Just as room correction/speaker EQ is best done in the processor and not the source, headphone EQ belongs in the headphone amp.

 

[Erispedia]

I quite like my HD800 with SoundID DSP by Sonarworks. Thankfully it’s still free for the time being. Tonality is a fixable problem so not a big deal. But the S class technicality of HD800(s) Is hard to pass.

 

[LightninBoy]

You're missing the soundstage, which is the HD800's claim to fame. Its mostly a function of driver size and positioning relative to the outer ear and simple frequency response measurements don't capture this.

It's almost the "directivity" of headphones (at least for circumaurals, it doesn't really exist in supraurals or IEMs) and there's no accepted way to measure it yet. This is kind of like if a speaker review left out the polars or DI curve or something. AFIK the only one who's even trying is RTINGS. I'm not convinced of his specific methods and scoring but he is showing that there is something there to measure.

I'm open to this explanation. But at the same time, if this is true, then I wonder if there is any value to Amir's measurements if the soundstage element is 1) impossible to measure and 2) so critical to the perceived sound quality that it completely overshadows a terrible FR response.

 

[amirm]

Many of those Windows machines are locked down corporate boxes, so there's a huge swath of headphone users left out.

And some people don't have a headphone, can't afford one, etc. I am not here to solve for world peace. By far the majority of headphone users are not using locked down machines and can utilize EQ for free. If someone doesn't then they can look at my no-EQ measurements and assessments to choose a headphone.

Please take follow ups to the complaint thread.

 

[jhaider]

Go ahead and move all my posts in this thread there. I don't particularly care about this particular headphone and my posts add no value to a discussion of it specifically. All of my posts in this thread relate to the basic error of basing recommendations on doctored product, which is I guess what you consider a complaint.

 

[Cahudson42]

I wonder if there is any value to Amir's measurements if the soundstage element is 1) impossible to measure and 2) so critical to the perceived sound quality that it completely overshadows a terrible FR response.

Now we see the Subjectivist 'good' argument against us Objectivists - that we measure stuff that is totally irrelevant to sound quality - and fail to measure that which is.

We will get there. Eventually blood-letting and the four humors gave way to germ theory etc. - and eventually we will be measuring the 'right stuff' ..

Which personally I think will have a lot more to do with transient response/damping, in addition to FR and Distortion..

 

[okok]

the original non S is better but gone too soon and the stock price is really high right now, can't find one

and the S keep dropping

 

[Blumlein 88]

I think the HD800 sounds like shite. It has a grating treble that can be headache-inducing. It was not designed to be a neutral-sound headphone, that’s for sure. Maybe it was designed to suit the tastes of individuals with high frequency hearing loss? I’m dead serious as 85% of people over the age of 40 have some sort of hearing loss, usually affecting frequencies over 16kHz.

I can assure you, now having just had another birthday, that my hearing loss has no effect whatsoever on frequencies over 16 khz.

 

[richard12511]

I dislike reviewing of headphones just about as I expected to on ASR. That field isn't on firm ground scientifically the way loudspeaker design is.

So much extra money for less accurate response needing EQ, but better subjective layering so recommended. Sounds more like something on SBAF than what belongs here. I think such continued reviewing will undermine what is otherwise the strong basis for so much reviewing of other gear on ASR. You'll end up having to use the same iffy practices to get a practical headphone review as is done elsewhere, but they don't limit it to headphones, rather having iffy practices for all gear. And people will be inclined to disbelief the best part of ASR when it suits them, because the site's owner does so himself on headphones.

This. Sad, but true . I'm not really sure what he can do differently, though. Headphones seem to be all over the place(compared to speakers), with much less science to back up any one approach. It kinda has to be a pure subjective review at this point .

I get your point, though. It measures god awful. Worse than any speaker we've ever seen(assuming the Harman Target is as valid as the neutral anechoic target), yet gets a recommendation because it sounds good. How is ASR any different than any other subjective reviewer?

Maybe we could start to hone on a more valid target curve that's better than the Harman Target, but that would require Amir to always do the subjective listen before seeing the measurements. We could then compare the EQed responses that Amir lands on to the HT and see how close they are. Listening after will no doubt bias the subjective impression towards agreeing with the Harman Target, and there's no denying that. With speakers it's less problematic, as we know with great certainty what the vast majority of listeners prefer, but this is so much further from the truth with headphones.

And yes, I realize that listening after seeing the measurements has its own advantages that are quite important. Honestly, I think we need both in this case. Listen before and EQ to taste. Then measure and EQ to the Harman Target. Finally, do a quick blind comparison between the custom EQ and the Harman EQ(much easier and faster than speaker blind tests).

PS: I own this headphone, and it's my favorite I've found so far, but I do find that it's severely lacking in bass compared to my loudspeakers.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Can I get someone to volunteer writing a mini article on all the EQ options available for different OS platforms?

This is an EQ option available for all the different OS's. Hmmm, maybe I didn't quite read that right.

 

[Billy Budapest]

Is there an advantage to trying the HD600 or HD650 if I already have a pair of HD800s? What is the quantifiable difference? Thanks!

Some of the quantifiable differences are graphed earlier in the thread regarding the 650 vis a vis the 800. As far as trying the HD600 and HD650, of course there is an advantage to trying them. The you get to see what you like better! First you have to find some pairs to try. Only you can judge which one you like the best. You know where I stand already.

 

[Degru]

Agree totally. Sadly, that's also the exact same argument used by some folks trying to say audible differences exist between dacs that measure the same. Which conflicts me somewhat.

I mean, it's true there as well. Just much more subtle.

 

[LightninBoy]

This is an EQ option available for all the different OS's. Hmmm, maybe I didn't quite read that right.
View attachment 99548

As a bonus, note that the left channel comes preconfigured with the recommended EQ settings for the HD800S headphones.

 

[amirm]

I get your point, though. It measures god awful. Worse than any speaker we've ever seen(assuming the Harman Target is as valid as the neutral anechoic target), yet gets a recommendation because it sounds good.

What? Did you read the review I wrote? I said it is only recommended with equalization. It is NOT recommended otherwise.

And no, there are plenty of speakers that are worse than this. Find me one that goes down to 20 Hz with equalization as this headphone does.

 

[amirm]

This. Sad, but true . I'm not really sure what he can do differently, though. Headphones seem to be all over the place(compared to speakers), with much less science to back up any one approach. It kinda has to be a pure subjective review at this point .

Not at all. There is no way I can evaluate headphones properly with just listening. Measurements are a must to point to potential problem areas where experimentation then starts to see if those areas need to be addressed or not. This is far from slapping a pair of headphones on and going on and on with random vocabulary to describe the sound.

 

[soundwave76]

Great review. Now lets wait for the STAX reviews...

 

[richard12511]

I stand corrected. Just had another look at the study.

On average, older listeners preferred 0.5dB to 1dB more treble than younger listeners.

The results are summarised in these box plots:

View attachment 99451

I have to agree with you that it's a reasonable hypothesis

Olive and Welti found that older listeners:

The fact that older listeners prefer both more treble and less bass does point to it being hearing loss related. @Frank Dernie 's logic does seem to make intuitive sense, though(at least to me).

Interesting.