Budget HD800? Soundstage & comfort recommendation, please!

[isostasy]

Curious how far they've placed Drop 8XX below HD800s, I thought they were the same thing. At least that's how they're advertised.

StaticV3 is correct though you bring up a good point, which is that the way rtings measure and present the data mean you can't see how much frequency response impacts the soundstage. It seems from your example that frequency response does make a big impact. I would find it helpful if rtings presented their soundstage score before and after equalisation to a consistent target (it wouldn't even matter particularly which one as long as it was the same).

@Dazerdoreal I'm not sure, from my experiments modding Fostex RP headphones I've found filling in the 1-2khz dip is extremely difficult. I have found ways to lift the upper mid range and lower treble but 1-2kHz is quite stubborn. So I have wondered if, for the planar magnetic headphones at least, there is some aspect of their design which makes this difficult rather than being on purpose.

 

[Dazerdoreal]

HD700 was very open sounding. But without EQ it's extremely sharp and just off sounding.
But from time to time they are showing with very good price.
Keep in mind that EQ is mandatory with them.

I also already thought about getting them, but my main problem with them is the pads. While it is still occasionally possible to get original pads, they wont be produced anymore, so on the long run 3rd party alternatives have to be used. And in that case EQing them properly will get harder. Dekoni has FR response graphs but they deviate even more from neutral than the originals, so I worry how well this would would work.

 

[ObjectiveSubjectivist]

I already thought about getting them, but my main problem with them is the pads. While it is still occasionally possible to get original pads, they wont be produced anymore, so on the long run 3rd party alternatives have to be used. And in that case EQing them properly will get harder. Dekoni has FR response graphs but they deviate even more from neutral than the originals, so I worry how well this would would work.

Fair point.
What about buying spare pads (until they are available) together with HD700.
Even two pairs? you will be covered for many years.

 

[Deleted member 60987]

Haven't heard them yet. I can only compare it to RTINGS sound profile charts of what I have. But 8.5 is a very high neutrality score. I've only seen 8.6 and 8.7 higher than that.

 

[asrUser]

At the moment Hifiman sells HE1000 for 1400 $US. That's a great bargain while not being inferior to HD800S at all.

 

[FrantzM]

I bought the Crinacle Zero because of Amir's review of it, the fact it measures very well. I wasn't disappointed by it, I was impressed! However, I've decided I can't really use IEM's, I don't like it pushing the ear wax back in, plus it made my ears sore after a while.....which might be solvable by finding an IEM that fits better, but I just don't really want to stick stuff in my ears. I bought them as a bit of an experiment, they do sound great though. Yeah, so me buying them has got nothing directly to do with the fact that they're associated with Crinacle or the fact he may have described the "Technical Grade" of them as whatever, I bought them due to Amir's review. I don't have a problem with Crinacle though (and I think he's a great asset for all his many headphone measurements he does), I don't follow his channels, but I wouldn't place much weight in his "Technical Grade Rating".

Bold is mine.. My sentiments, exactly.
+1000

Peace

 

[asrUser]

I've decided I can't really use IEM's, I don't like it pushing the ear wax back in

I agree about that. This is one of the reasons I prefer Dunu S&S eartips as those don't need to be pushed in like all other tips. I also couldn't wear the Zero for long, because the nozzle is too thick. Luckily there are a lot of other great budget IEMs. And well, even if you need to clean your ears more because of IEMs, it's still worth it for enjoying music.

 

[Deleted member 60987]

560S

Having owned 10 pairs (including Aeon 2 Noire, DT 880 600 Ohm, HD660S) I would consider 560S as end game. Only headphones that might peak my interest would be actual HD800.

The 560s sound good until I compare them to Shure 440, Rockville Pro-M50, Sennheiser 361 and they seem lacking in depth. But I am beginning to think that is a Sennheiser trait to make things sound smooth and even.

 

[Deleted member 60987]

If you want quite reputable opinion then sort this Crinacle table by Technical Grade column:

crinacle's Headphone Ranking List – In-Ear Fidelity

If it's not on the list, it doesn't exist.

crinacle.com

This one uses Crinkle and Oratory1990 https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq/blob/master/results/RANKING.md

 

[usern]

The 560s sound good until I compare them to Shure 440, Rockville Pro-M50, Sennheiser 361 and they seem lacking in depth. But I am beginning to think that is a Sennheiser trait to make things sound smooth and even.

Do you use equalization? What is depth? What is smooth and even?

 

[Deleted member 60987]

Do you use equalization? What is depth? What is smooth and even?

No, none of them are hooked into the computer, other than a pair of Rockville M50s. 4 are coming out of my Tascam multitrack machine, 6 are coming out of my dedicated CD Recorder. I have a few of separate rack mounted 10 band graphic EQs but they aren't plugged in at present.

 

[usern]

No, none of them are hooked into the computer, other than a pair of Rockville M50s. 4 are coming out of my Tascam multitrack machine, 6 are coming out of my dedicated CD Recorder. I have a few of separate rack mounted 10 band graphic EQs but they aren't plugged in at present.

560S have fairly low distortion for dynamic drivers so they can take EQ AND you can crank them up loud. In addition they have better than average not-inside-head effect (soundstage?). If you don't use EQ then you are in youtube reviewer territory who don't speak about distortion and EQ and how similar or not headphones sound when equalized to same target in which case we have no common ground with terms like depth, smooth, even.

 

[Deleted member 60987]

560S have fairly low distortion for dynamic drivers so they can take EQ AND you can crank them up loud. In addition they have better than average not-inside-head effect (soundstage?). If you don't use EQ then you are in youtube reviewer territory who don't speak about distortion and EQ and how similar or not headphones sound when equalized to same target in which case we have no common ground with terms like depth, smooth, even.

That's true. You use equipment to listen to albums. I use equipment to make albums.

 

[Erwan]

I don't have much experience in these scientific measurements, but in the RTing article, I find their ranking a bit messed up in the sense that you can see that the K702 has a score of 8.3 while the HD600 scores 7.4, which is 0.9 difference.

I mainly use my headphones to play competitive games on my computer, I used the K702 for about 5 or 6 years before the right driver broke (one of the wires unsoldered and I don't have the tools to fix it). I had the opportunity to pick up an HD600 for really cheap, so I was tempted.

Far from being disappointed by this one, the listening is much more dynamic, more detailed, more organic... But I can also say that the soundstage is much "smaller", on my k702, I could locate precisely sounds on the vertical and horizontal axes in a sphere of about 8-10m around me, sometimes even more depending on the in-game sound mix, on the HD600, the sound scene is not non-existent, but I find it much less precise in this area, my decisions are sure in the field of about 5m.
So I think that 0.9 point difference is really little compared to the differences in performance and therefore it is not really representative of the performance of our equipment.

All this remains purely subjective and linked to my perception of the sound but I think it can be useful !

 

[Deleted member 60987]

I don't have much experience in these scientific measurements, but in the RTing article, I find their ranking a bit messed up in the sense that you can see that the K702 has a score of 8.3 while the HD600 scores 7.4, which is 0.9 difference.

I mainly use my headphones to play competitive games on my computer, I used the K702 for about 5 or 6 years before the right driver broke (one of the wires unsoldered and I don't have the tools to fix it). I had the opportunity to pick up an HD600 for really cheap, so I was tempted.

Far from being disappointed by this one, the listening is much more dynamic, more detailed, more organic... But I can also say that the soundstage is much "smaller", on my k702, I could locate precisely sounds on the vertical and horizontal axes in a sphere of about 8-10m around me, sometimes even more depending on the in-game sound mix, on the HD600, the sound scene is not non-existent, but I find it much less precise in this area, my decisions are sure in the field of about 5m.
So I think that 0.9 point difference is really little compared to the differences in performance and therefore it is not really representative of the performance of our equipment.

All this remains purely subjective and linked to my perception of the sound but I think it can be useful !

Neutrality ratings are like IQ tests. They give you one number that average abilities. So headphones that are extremely different can have the same score in neutrality. One is very flat in the lows and mids but boosts or cuts in the highs. Another is very flat in the highs and mids but cuts lows. These sound very different but can have the same neutrality scores. Just like it is a bit deceptive to give a single number for intelligence neutrality is the same. It is like saying the average peak of a mountain range. Could you draw that range from a single number? No. All averages suffer from too much variety when they try to generalize. As an example the Philips SPH 9500 is much warmer than the Superlux 681. But they are side by side in a neutrality rating from RTINGS. The Sennheiser 560 also have an 8.3 and are even MORE different sounding than the 681s,

 

[isostasy]

I don't have much experience in these scientific measurements, but in the RTing article, I find their ranking a bit messed up in the sense that you can see that the K702 has a score of 8.3 while the HD600 scores 7.4, which is 0.9 difference.

I mainly use my headphones to play competitive games on my computer, I used the K702 for about 5 or 6 years before the right driver broke (one of the wires unsoldered and I don't have the tools to fix it). I had the opportunity to pick up an HD600 for really cheap, so I was tempted.

Far from being disappointed by this one, the listening is much more dynamic, more detailed, more organic... But I can also say that the soundstage is much "smaller", on my k702, I could locate precisely sounds on the vertical and horizontal axes in a sphere of about 8-10m around me, sometimes even more depending on the in-game sound mix, on the HD600, the sound scene is not non-existent, but I find it much less precise in this area, my decisions are sure in the field of about 5m.
So I think that 0.9 point difference is really little compared to the differences in performance and therefore it is not really representative of the performance of our equipment.

All this remains purely subjective and linked to my perception of the sound but I think it can be useful !

Shame about the wires, now you have another set of headphones I'd recommend getting an affordable soldering iron and having a go repairing your K702 as no loss if you mess it up.

Anyway, to understand rtings soundstage scores, read this article .

Specifically, you can see they put 50% of their weighting on 'openness' and 'acoustic space excitation' combined! And if you compare those 2 headphones on rtings website, the HD600 actually scores higher for those metrics. I would guess they both score similarly highly on these because they are both open-back, with minimal damping and velour pads which do not impede airflow as much as denser materials. So they are very open front and back really.

The upshot is that despite the HD600 scoring lower on the PRTF measures, the way rtings calculate the overall soundstage score results in it being not much lower than that of the K702.

Whether you agree with this is another matter. Your subjective experience seems to be that the 'openness' and 'acoustic space excitation' is not a good measure of soundstage, at least in comparing these 2 headphones alone.

n.b. ignore the other reply to your post, he is speaking about 'neutrality' scores, not what you asked about.

 

[Erwan]

Neutrality ratings are like IQ tests. They give you one number that average abilities. So headphones that are extremely different can have the same score in neutrality. One is very flat in the lows and mids but boosts or cuts in the highs. Another is very flat in the highs and mids but cuts lows. These sound very different but can have the same neutrality scores. Just like it is a bit deceptive to give a single number for intelligence neutrality is the same. It is like saying the average peak of a mountain range. Could you draw that range from a single number? No. All averages suffer from too much variety when they try to generalize. As an example the Philips SPH 9500 is much warmer than the Superlux 681. But they are side by side in a neutrality rating from RTINGS. The Sennheiser 560 also have an 8.3 and are even MORE different sounding than the 681s,

I was talking about soundstage but, yep, the only "good" way is testing stuff !

 

[Erwan]

Shame about the wires, now you have another set of headphones I'd recommend getting an affordable soldering iron and having a go repairing your K702 as no loss if you mess it up.

Anyway, to understand rtings soundstage scores, read this article .

Specifically, you can see they put 50% of their weighting on 'openness' and 'acoustic space excitation' combined! And if you compare those 2 headphones on rtings website, the HD600 actually scores higher for those metrics. I would guess they both score similarly highly on these because they are both open-back, with minimal damping and velour pads which do not impede airflow as much as denser materials. So they are very open front and back really.

The upshot is that despite the HD600 scoring lower on the PRTF measures, the way rtings calculate the overall soundstage score results in it being not much lower than that of the K702.

Whether you agree with this is another matter. Your subjective experience seems to be that the 'openness' and 'acoustic space excitation' is not a good measure of soundstage, at least in comparing these 2 headphones alone.

n.b. ignore the other reply to your post, he is speaking about 'neutrality' scores, not what you asked about.

After having read carefully and understood the meaning of the metrics used in this article, at least in the main lines, it puts exactly the finger on what I was trying to explain.

The soundstage is indeed smaller (PRTF Distance HD600 : 9.21dB vs K702 : 12.42dB) but especially much less "precise" (PRTF Accuracy HD600 : 2.91 dB vs K702 : 1.74 dB, the lower, the better).

I don't think I have an ear as sharp as an audiophile, but despite that, I could realize it from the very first use, there is a kind of blur after 5m of distance (on Apex Legends and Overwatch 2 for those who are interested). This blur was almost absent on my K702 which allowed me to pinpoint isolated enemies in very crowded areas in terms of surrounding sounds (I don't know if I'm clear enough).

It didn't bother me more than that, but I wanted to know why, and I think I have at least part of my answer thanks to you, thanks a lot Isostasy

 

[phrwn]

What does "Technical Grade" even mean, and how has he determined that? I'd be wary to put much stock in that.

I think Crinacle does a reasonable job of explaining the 'Technicalities' bit in the article that explains his evaluation system. He also acknowledges it's hazy and even controversial, but it seems worthwhile to try to explain why we can't all just EQ Porta Pros to be the exact equivalent of literally anything 'better'.

The Tonal-Technical Dichotomy: The IEF Evaluation System – In-Ear Fidelity

An update of the "Technical Ability" article, explaining the concepts of 'tonality' and 'technicalities' which are the cornerstones of the IEF ranking system.

crinacle.com

 

[phrwn]

Granted, you cannot EQ Porta Pros to anything to create a really great headphone, but the explanations Crinacle is giving are just extremely hand-waving, superficial and often even scientifically wrong. Not much worth in it.

Right. Ok. Great.
Bye.