• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Austrian Audio Hi-X60 Headphone Review

Rate this headphone:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 21 16.2%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 80 61.5%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 24 18.5%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 5 3.8%

  • Total voters
    130
The output resistance of the amp is irrelevant in this case because it is in series with the signal and not the return (ground) path.
The culprit is the resistance of the single return wire in combination with the low impedance of the headphone.

So it looks like it isn't the short wiring in the headphone.
3m is 2.5x longer than 1.2m
When the same type of cable is used the resistance thus is 2.5x 0.34ohm = 0.85ohm.
This would result in -29.7dB crosstalk.

Seems case closed... Austrian Audio messed up with their cable.
The X60 being the only real well measuring and sounding (apart from the sharpness) headphone from them says something about their engineering.
Too bad really ...

Let us know how the Azurys did.

Start looking for closed headphones that can also be used on balanced devices (4-wire cables, dual entry)

Headphone cables can matter with low impedance headphones on this particular aspect that indeed is rarely (if ever) measured.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for solving the cause! :)

I've just spent hours looking at headphone measurements and I'll be returning the Azurys unopened (I think this is more fair to the store). So I won't be able to let you know how it does on the crosstalk issue. But it seems likely it'll also have a slight crosstalk problem and I also just realized it not that well closed/isolating (and a few other things I'm not too excited about).
Have just ordered the HD620S instead. I think it'll do great for my needs.
 
These are 4-wire, despite being single entry so should not have these issues.

Just a bit fiddly to get a good seal.
 
Since I've been beating on the Austrian Audio Hi-X60 here a few positive words about it :)

Compared to the HD620S and Sony MDR-M1 the Hi-X60 is by far the most capable headphone in my personal opinion.
The HD620S is quite limited to my ears. It sounds coloured in all areas, bass, mids and treble. Treble doesn't sound "dry" but instead sounds like it's reflecting quite a bit in the cup (which combined with the tuning gives some sort of "pseudo soundstage" which may work with some music but certainly not with some other music). Didn't have any problems with the seal btw, also quite comfortable headphone more than the HD560S (HD620S clearly has bigger earcups).
The Sony MDR-M1 sounds like it has the least capable driver of the 3, bass and treble don't feel extended or capable of it with EQ, but at least the treble is "dry". Feels cheap plasticy and with the smallest earcups it doesn't feel "immersive", almost goes a little bit in the direction of on-ears. (oh and default tuning has a partical Sony bad muddy sounding bass boost that runs well into the lower mids, also tried a WH1000XM5 which has the same bass tuning it seems but is even worse overall)
The Hi-X60 is extended and clean. However it suffers the most from what appear to be driver resonances in the treble. I couldn't get it to sound neutral.
Oh and lastly the Apple Airpods Max. It's very warm and bassy sounding, for a large part due to darkness in the low-mid treble. It sounds most pleasant for "consumer audio" perhaps of all. Not for a detailed sound and if you EQ it to fix the dark low-mid treble then it's just not there it gets a bit grainy and limited and things like that so the darkness is needed to have it sound good. Also excessive processing and bluetooth compression. Not for hi-end sound (but can be great sounding and immersive for "consumer sound").

Also compared these headphones with the 7Hz Zero:2 in-ear which cost me only 21 euro inc shipping.
There is no comparison whatsoever. The Zero:2 walks all over the above mentioned closed headphones in every area. It's not even remotely close.
Only the Hi-X60 (and perhaps the Airpods Max in the bass) could kind of sound a little bit in this direction but not really.
Personally I'm done with headphones. Only in-ears for me from now on. (but not wireless, Apple Airpods Pro2 and Samsung Galaxy Buds 2 Pro don't come close either to the Zero:2)
But if one has to use closed headphones then perhaps the Hi-X60 isn't a bad choice for the money, especially in studio monitoring settings (but I wouldn't personally mix on it).
 
Last edited:
I will be adding the common return wire measurements to future reviews with an explanation like what is shown below.


return wire cable resistance matters

A return wire is the wire running from pin-1 of the 3-pin mini-XLR or other connector in the headphone with just 3 contacts to the sleeve of the 3.5/6.3 jack plug. This wire is used for both drivers. Cross-talk is not the same as cross-feed, in fact the effect is opposite and has a 'widening' effect whereas cross-feed has a 'narrowing' effect.
When a signal is applied to one channel a current will flow. That current will create a voltage drop across the return wire. That voltage is inverted in polarity opposite the applied voltage so subtracted from the applied signal. By itself not problematic other than some (impedance dependent) attenuation but... when there also is a signal applied to the other channel that dropped voltage will double for 'mono' signals and is subtracted (polarity inverted signal) from the other channel lowering the level of the mono signals.
In case there is stereo info (L and R having different signals) that stereo signal will be reproduced inverted in polarity in the other channel. This means the stereo image is 'widened' artificially and is not desirable. The mechanism behind this is shown below in the form of a schematic.
3-wire cable.png


As (headphone X) is low impedance (32Ω) and has a 3-wire cable there will be cross-talk between the left and right driver. How much depends on the resistance of the 'return wire' of the cable and the impedance of the headphone. This affects stereo separation and imaging.
The 3m straight cable return wire has a 0.5Ω resistance and the coiled cable return wire has a 1.45Ω resistance. This does not seem to be much but results in, stereo signal dependent and even a bit frequency dependent, cross-talk and thus imaging change of -36dB for the straight cable and a whopping -27dB when using coiled cable.
 
Last edited:
I will be adding the common return wire measurements to future reviews with an explanation like what is shown below.
I assume this will be based upon cross-talk measurements. Would you separate the headphones internal wiring (in the case of a single side connector HP) from the cable(s)?
 
simple resistance measurement of the return wire and using the impedance of the driver it is easy to calculate.
 
Last edited:
What I did shortly after I bought these headphones was to solder the SE cable from a higher quality 4-core wire. This improved the dynamics and channel separation a little. Later I modified these headphones to be balanced and support the original SE cable. To do this, you need to replace the socket in the left cup. This improved the dynamics and channel separation even more. They are not so boring now, and for the money, most likely, pretty good headphones.
It even seems to me that they deserve an updated model with reduced peaks at high frequencies, reduced hump at midbass, a 4-pin 2.5mm jack and high-quality copper cable 22-24 AWG.

bal trrs_.jpg
 
Last edited:
I will be adding the common return wire measurements to future reviews with an explanation like what is shown below.


return wire cable resistance matters

A return wire is the wire running from pin-1 of the 3-pin mini-XLR or other connector in the headphone with just 3 contacts to the sleeve of the 3.5/6.3 jack plug. This wire is used for both drivers. Cross-talk is not the same as cross-feed, in fact the effect is opposite and has a 'widening' effect whereas cross-feed has a 'narrowing' effect.
When a signal is applied to one channel a current will flow. That current will create a voltage drop across the return wire. That voltage is inverted in polarity opposite the applied voltage so subtracted from the applied signal. By itself not problematic other than some (impedance dependent) attenuation but... when there also is a signal applied to the other channel that dropped voltage will double for 'mono' signals and is subtracted (polarity inverted signal) from the other channel lowering the level of the mono signals.
In case there is stereo info (L and R having different signals) that stereo signal will be reproduced inverted in polarity in the other channel. This means the stereo image is 'widened' artificially and is not desirable. The mechanism behind this is shown below in the form of a schematic.
View attachment 411702

As (headphone X) is low impedance (32Ω) and has a 3-wire cable there will be cross-talk between the left and right driver. How much depends on the resistance of the 'return wire' of the cable and the impedance of the headphone. This affects stereo separation and imaging.
The 3m straight cable return wire has a 0.5Ω resistance and the coiled cable return wire has a 1.45Ω resistance. This does not seem to be much but results in, stereo signal dependent and even a bit frequency dependent, cross-talk and thus imaging change of -36dB for the straight cable and a whopping -27dB when using coiled cable.
The problem is as old as the world, but they continue to save one wire in the cable))
 
What I did shortly after I bought these headphones was to solder the SE cable from a higher quality 4-core wire. This improved the dynamics and channel separation a little. Later I modified these headphones to be balanced and support the original SE cable. To do this, you need to replace the socket in the left cup. This improved the dynamics and channel separation even more. They are not so boring now, and for the money, most likely, pretty good headphones.
It even seems to me that they deserve an updated model with reduced peaks at high frequencies, reduced hump at midbass, a 4-pin 2.5mm jack and high-quality copper cable 22-24 AWG.

View attachment 421821


What do you mean by more dynamics, how does that relate to the wire type assuming same power level?

Channel separation? do you mean channel matching? was there previously a flaw in your unit that would have possibly been addressed?
 
Channel separation (stereo imaging) surely will have changed and might even be audible.

The dynamics are less likely to change.
 
I think the driver's pulse response changes a little because of the lower cable resistance and lower inductance. As they say, the lower the driver's resistance, the more hungry it is for current than for voltage. And the quality of the wires primarily affects current than voltage.
 
I will be adding the common return wire measurements to future reviews with an explanation like what is shown below.


return wire cable resistance matters

A return wire is the wire running from pin-1 of the 3-pin mini-XLR or other connector in the headphone with just 3 contacts to the sleeve of the 3.5/6.3 jack plug. This wire is used for both drivers. Cross-talk is not the same as cross-feed, in fact the effect is opposite and has a 'widening' effect whereas cross-feed has a 'narrowing' effect.
When a signal is applied to one channel a current will flow. That current will create a voltage drop across the return wire. That voltage is inverted in polarity opposite the applied voltage so subtracted from the applied signal. By itself not problematic other than some (impedance dependent) attenuation but... when there also is a signal applied to the other channel that dropped voltage will double for 'mono' signals and is subtracted (polarity inverted signal) from the other channel lowering the level of the mono signals.
In case there is stereo info (L and R having different signals) that stereo signal will be reproduced inverted in polarity in the other channel. This means the stereo image is 'widened' artificially and is not desirable. The mechanism behind this is shown below in the form of a schematic.
View attachment 411702

As (headphone X) is low impedance (32Ω) and has a 3-wire cable there will be cross-talk between the left and right driver. How much depends on the resistance of the 'return wire' of the cable and the impedance of the headphone. This affects stereo separation and imaging.
The 3m straight cable return wire has a 0.5Ω resistance and the coiled cable return wire has a 1.45Ω resistance. This does not seem to be much but results in, stereo signal dependent and even a bit frequency dependent, cross-talk and thus imaging change of -36dB for the straight cable and a whopping -27dB when using coiled cable.
The middle wire primarily affects channel separation. To fix this, it is enough to use 4 wires - two for each driver, where the two negative wires are connected in the connector near the amplifier. Even in cheap koss porta pro it's done right)
 
Yep, see post #65.

There are plenty of headphones using 4-wire cables (connecting in the TRS jack) but many are 3-wire.
I don't think manufacturers even know about the possible consequences of 3-wire cables.
Mostly the 'single sided cable entry' headphones. The dual entry headphones usually are 4-wire.

Pulse response is not affected though, the inductance of the wire is negligible compared to that of any dynamic driver.
Assuming we have 3m of cable the average inductance of that total cable would be around 6uH then at 20kHz the impedance is 0.7ohm and using a 32ohm driver this means 0.2dB treble roll-off at 20kHz.
Because 'impulses' in music are around 8kHz the impedance already dropped to 0.3ohm so an inaudible 0.08dB attenuation.

Any perceived improvement of impulse response is more than likely placebo... until it is proven with measurements or easy to reason.
 
Back
Top Bottom