Best Headphone ASR Has Reviewed

[SimpleTheater]

Just finished reading the latest review on the Audeze LCD-24 and I'm not sure what headphone Amir likes best of the ones he's tested.

So Dan Clark's Aeon RT got a swinging panther, as did the LCD-24 (after EQ), as did a few other headphones. However, headphones have the additional requirement of not just measuring well, but being comfortable to wear. Removing price from the equation, is there a way to tell which one Amir thinks is the absolute best?

 

[Taddpole]

Comfortable to wear seems somewhat subjective thing though.

 

[abdo123]

I think he enjoyed the high-end Hifiman headphones (effortless-ness) and the Sennheiser HD800S (fun imaging) the most.

 

[Robin L]

I think, overall, the Sennheiser HD 650:

"Sennheiser HD650 Listening Tests and Equalization
The HD650 sounds like it measures. That is, it has a very good sound and tonality out of the box -- better than any other headphone I have tested. No wonder that I am often surprised how good it is when I go back to testing it for a few seconds after using another for a long time. You can however do much, much better with just a bit of equalization . . ."

 

[Blank Verse]

I think, overall, the Sennheiser HD 650:

"Sennheiser HD650 Listening Tests and Equalization
The HD650 sounds like it measures. That is, it has a very good sound and tonality out of the box -- better than any other headphone I have tested. No wonder that I am often surprised how good it is when I go back to testing it for a few seconds after using another for a long time. You can however do much, much better with just a bit of equalization . . ."

That is the headphone Amir liked best, but it is not the best headphone ASR has reviewed because all this is quite subjective. The HD650 is too dark for my taste, even the HD600 is. At the same time, most brighter headphones are poorly implemented and are grating at the higher registers. It is hard to find a headphone which offers a natural reproduction without being offensive in one way or another. I'm not saying the HD580/HD600/HD650 are bad. I have an HD580 myself which I love, but once you have listened to something more transparent you realize these are not that neutral (the HD650 even less so).

 

[markanini]

That is the headphone Amir liked best, but it is not the best headphone ASR has reviewed because all this is quite subjective. The HD650 is too dark for my taste, even the HD600 is. At the same time, most brighter headphones are poorly implemented and are grating at the higher registers. It is hard to find a headphone which offers a natural reproduction without being offensive in one way or another. I'm not saying the HD580/HD600/HD650 are bad. I have an HD580 myself which I love, but once you have listened to something more transparent you realize these are not that neutral (the HD650 even less so).

What's a diffuse field tunes headphone?

 

[Vini darko]

The £9 sony on ear. He even wore them on youtube podcasts.

 

[Robin L]

That is the headphone Amir liked best, but it is not the best headphone ASR has reviewed because all this is quite subjective. The HD650 is too dark for my taste, even the HD600 is. At the same time, most brighter headphones are poorly implemented and are grating at the higher registers. It is hard to find a headphone which offers a natural reproduction without being offensive in one way or another. I'm not saying the HD580/HD600/HD650 are bad. I have an HD580 myself which I love, but once you have listened to something more transparent you realize these are not that neutral (the HD650 even less so).

Nonsense, you're moving the goal posts. Amir noted how the Sennheiser closely matched the Harman curve between 100 hz and up. That might not be your idea of proper eq for headphones, but it's Amir's standard and ASR is Amir's site. So, the subjectivity is yours. I'm guessing you like bright sounding headphones. You're the outlier here. Brighter is not more transparent, it's just brighter.

 

[Blank Verse]

What's a diffuse field tunes headphone?

The Diffuse Field target was the predominant method to design headphones before the Harman Curve/Curves. I think most headphones up to the early to mid 90s used the Diffuse Field target. If you want to experiment it, you can buy a vintage headphone that is tuned to it and compare it to a modern headphone that is tuned to one of the Harman curves.

The Diffuse Field to me sounds much more transparent and true to the source, and it creates a much better sense of space. The soundstage from an HD540, for example, is much larger and more accurate than the HD600, which is narrower. A good Diffuse Field headphone will sound much airier, with well defined sound across the spectrum. I find that even my HD580 is too heavy on the bass for my taste. The famous "Sennheiser veil" came to be around the HD580 generation, and is a product of a shift to the Harman curve from the Diffuse Field target.

If you are interested in a vintage headphone and want to know if it is a Diffuse Field headphone you can search for the manual online. For example, the Sennheiser HD520, HD530, and HD540 that I have are all Diffuse Field. Another notable one is the AKG K240DF (guess what the DF stands for), which is claimed to be the best of the K240 family.

 

[markanini]

The Diffuse Field target was the predominant method to design headphones before the Harman Curve/Curves. I think most headphones up to the early to mid 90s used the Diffuse Field target. If you want to experiment it, you can buy a vintage headphone that is tuned to it and compare it to a modern headphone that is tuned to one of the Harman curves.

The Diffuse Field to me sounds much more transparent and true to the source, and it creates a much better sense of space. The soundstage from an HD540, for example, is much larger and more accurate than the HD600, which is narrower. A good Diffuse Field headphone will sound much airier, with well defined sound across the spectrum. I find that even my HD580 is too heavy on the bass for my taste. The famous "Sennheiser veil" came to be around the HD580 generation, and is a product of a shift to the Harman curve from the Diffuse Field target.

If you are interested in a vintage headphone and want to know if it is a Diffuse Field headphone you can search for the manual online. For example, the Sennheiser HD520, HD530, and HD540 that I have are all Diffuse Field. Another notable one is the AKG K240DF (guess what the DF stands for), which is claimed to be the best of the K240 family.

Looks closer to Harman than DF: https://headphonedatabase.com/oratory/headphones?ids=217

 

[Blank Verse]

Nonsense, you're moving the goal posts. Amir noted how the Sennheiser closely matched the Harman curve between 100 hz and up. That might not be your idea of proper eq for headphones, but it's Amir's standard and ASR is Amir's site. So, the subjectivity is yours. I'm guessing you like bright sounding headphones. You're the outlier here. Brighter is not more transparent, it's just brighter.

I didn't move any goal posts, because the OP didn't ask "Which headphone ASR has reviewed is most faithful to the Harman curve?"

I used to slobber all over my HD580 (which are about 20 years old). They are pleasing headphones, and nothing they do is blatantly bad. It's what they don't do that I don't like, and you can't form an educated opinion until you have compared it to the alternative (a well designed and implemented Diffuse Field target headphone). My HD540 Ref II are not really bright, they are simply more transparent, more faithful to the source. They are unveiled, they are articulate, and the soundstage is true to life. When I hear a cymbal crash with my HD540 I hear the actual thing. And I can't tell you how many times I have had to remove my HD540 from my head because I heard subtle noises (like small clicks, creaks, or the sound of an amp being hooked up, for example) in recordings which I never knew were there, and which are so real that make me think somebody in the room caused them, instead of them being in the recording.

The HD580 and HD600 are superb headphones, but the HD540 is much better for me. BTW, I don't have an HD600, but I listened to one for a while and I could almost not tell it apart from my HD580.

 

[Blank Verse]

Looks closer to Harman than DF: https://headphonedatabase.com/oratory/headphones?ids=217

How did you come up with that conclusion? I think you need to take a look at the DF curve and the Harman Curve for Circumaural headphones and then look at the HD Ref II curve again.

 

[BrEpBrEpBrEpBrEp]

The famous "Sennheiser veil" came to be around the HD580 generation, and is a product of a shift to the Harman curve from the Diffuse Field target.

The HD580 came out in the early 90s, long before the Harman curve was even a twinkle in Sean Olive's eye. I don't think any of the Sennheiser headphones were actually designed to follow the Harman research.

 

[Blank Verse]

BTW, I just looked at the manuals for the HD600 and the HD650 and in both the specifications state that they are Diffuse Field equalized headphones, but I think Sennheiser is using that term a little loosely, since it appears they are not targetting the Diffuse Field curve as closely as something like the HD540 or the K240DF. In other words, it seems as if Sennheiser moved away progressively from the DF curve to something closer to the Harman curve, so that the HD650 is somewhere in between. I believe the HD800 reversed that trend and it is much closer to the DF curve, which explains why half of the world think it is a bright headphone and the other half thinks it is just much more accurate. I wonder if Sennheiser has any headphones that admit to targeting the Harman curve in their specifications.

 

[MRC01]

... I used to slobber all over my HD580 (which are about 20 years old). They are pleasing headphones, and nothing they do is blatantly bad. It's what they don't do that I don't like ...

I agree! I'm listening to HD580 right now, that I've owned for over 20 years.

... My HD540 Ref II are not really bright, they are simply more transparent, more faithful to the source. They are unveiled, they are articulate, and the soundstage is true to life. ...

You may be overlooking how subjective headphones are. By playing music directly into your ears, they bypass your HRTF, so their response curve must reproduce the HRTF. But HRTF varies significantly from person to person, so the best a headphone can do is resemble an average HRTF taken over a large population. That's why people disagree and debate which headphones sound "best" or "most realistic" moreso than they do with loudspeakers.

To me, most headphones (including the HD580) sound brighter than reality and that unnatural treble emphasis is fatiguing. The HD580 is less bright than most other headphones (hence the "Sennheiser veil" reputation), but I find the Audeze LCD-2F a closer match to what reality sounds like to me. Yet to most people they are warm/dull/veiled sounding.

The HD580 and HD600 are superb headphones ... BTW, I don't have an HD600, but I listened to one for a while and I could almost not tell it apart from my HD580.

I also owned an original HD600 and sold it. It was indistinguishable from the HD580; it's the same drivers & headphone made more expensive to suit audiophile tastes.

 

[Blank Verse]

The HD580 came out in the early 90s, long before the Harman curve was even a twinkle in Sean Olive's eye. I don't think any of the Sennheiser headphones were actually designed to follow the Harman research.

Yes, you are right, as I stated in my post above. But even the HD580, HD600, and HD650 have shifted closer to what Harman target. I guess they made their own interpretation of what people wanted to hear and bent and interpreted the DF target accordingly. There is no denying that, in order of brightness, HD540 > HD580 = HD600 > HD650.

 

[BrEpBrEpBrEpBrEp]

Yes, you are right, as I stated in my post above. But even the HD580, HD600, and HD650 have shifted closer to what Harman target. I guess they made their own interpretation of what people wanted to hear and bent and interpreted the DF target accordingly. There is no denying that, in order of brightness, HD540 > HD580 = HD600 > HD650.

https://headphonedatabase.com/oratory/headphones?ids=217,70,271,187

That's really debatable, depending on what one feels is "bright". The 540 has more bass and mids than any of the others. And the HD600 and 650 are far closer to each other than the HD580 and 600.

As @MRC01 said, things like soundstage can vary wildly depending on fit and the shape of your head/ears, so YMMV.

 

[Blank Verse]

You may be overlooking how subjective headphones are. By playing music directly into your ears, they bypass your HRTF, so their response curve must reproduce the HRTF. But HRTF varies significantly from person to person, so the best a headphone can do is resemble an average HRTF taken over a large population. That's why people disagree and debate which headphones sound "best" or "most realistic" moreso than they do with loudspeakers.

I understand your point, you are right. I think this subjectivity is why people are so passionate and opinionated when it comes to headphones. Not only you are accounting for absolutely subjective factors like preference, but also practical, measurable differences like HRTF.

To me, most headphones (including the HD580) sound brighter than reality and that unnatural treble emphasis is fatiguing. The HD580 is less bright than most other headphones (hence the "Sennheiser veil" reputation), but I find the Audeze LCD-2F a closer match to what reality sounds like to me. Yet to most people they are warm/dull/veiled sounding.

I haven't heard the Audeze LCD-2F, but the HD580 (the one I have, probably a 3rd or 4th generation, bought in 2002 if I remember correctly), is not bright, but a little dark in fact.

And we are going back to the differences among people we mentioned earlier. The best way to approach this is to let your ears guide you. I value realism not only just in the frequency response (and that includes the timbre), but also in the soundstage. If your headphones represent the sonic world in such a way that they disappear from your head and you can only hear the music, then you have a set of headphones you should keep. It looks like the LCD-2F are that for you, so congratulations!

I also owned an original HD600 and sold it. It was indistinguishable from the HD580; it's the same drivers & headphone made more expensive to suit audiophile tastes.

Crazy, huh? To think that back when I bought my HD580 I picked them over the HD600 simply because I thought the countertop finish looked cheesy.

 

[Blank Verse]

https://headphonedatabase.com/oratory/headphones?ids=217,70,271,187

That's really debatable, depending on what one feels is "bright". The 540 has more bass and mids than any of the others. And the HD600 and 650 are far closer to each other than the HD580 and 600.

As @MRC01 said, things like soundstage can vary wildly depending on fit and the shape of your head/ears, so YMMV.

I would take those graphs with a huge pinch of salt. The HD540 Ref II are very sensitive to earpad configuration, it can go from relatively bassy and warm to bright depending on whether you are using velour earpads, pleather earpads, the density of the foam, the depth of the earcups, etc. This is also part of the reason why I consider them one of the best dynamic headphones ever designed, because you can tune them with some experimentation to your preference. My HD540 Ref II are definitely not bassier than my HD580, I can tell you that. I would really like to know what was the condition the HD540 Ref II Oratory tested and what earpads they had on.

Normally I am suspicious of measurements, but in this case I can tell you they mean practically nothing, from my own experience.

Probably the best way to do an appraisal of how the sound has evolved would be to look at vintage reviews made by panels of people in magazines in the trade when these headphones were released, and also consider that if the Harman curve has had an effect in headphone manifacturing, and shaped people's preferences and expectations, it has also done so for Sennheiser. The HD800 is a different story, and I have no idea about even higher end headphones like the Orpheus. I have to assume the Orpheus is not tuned to the Harman curve!

 

[markanini]

How did you come up with that conclusion? I think you need to take a look at the DF curve and the Harman Curve for Circumaural headphones and then look at the HD Ref II curve again.

By checking an available measurement against both targets. The bigger question is how did you determine they were DF tuned?