• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

HD6XX bass

3125b

Senior Member
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
369
Likes
343
Location
Germany
The build quality seems to be awful.
Well, judging by my HE-35X, it is indeed pretty bad, might be better on the more expensive 4XX. However HiFiMAN in general has a strong reputation for lack of quality control, kind of a deal breaker if you are importing them.
I have heard the HE-400i, liked them, but wouldn't call them "bassy".
I agree with solderdude in that you might indeed be better served with closed back headphones, they can produce more pressure at lower levels.
If you don't want to spend a lot, the AKG K371 are a good option, solid allrounder and suited for mobile use.
 

solderdude

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
6,372
Likes
11,826
Location
The Neverlands
These are incredibly bassy and tizzy in the treble.
Avoid Ultrasone like the plague most of them have rough treble !
measured by Ultrasone themselves:

Bassheads love these though.

The K371 is good in tonal balance, not bassy but extended.
The microphonic cable and somewhat coarse (as in not refined) treble but me of those pretty quickly.
Cheap and bassy think:
DT770, Custom One Pro, or Pro82.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 21, 2019
Messages
90
Likes
23
is it the Ultrasone Pro 900i version or pro 900. The whole point of bassy second is i dont care if its tonal or not as long as bass isnt boomy distorted cheap sounding mess. The treble is a concern, dont like ear piercing highs. Ill look into DT770, Custom One Pro, or Pro82 as recommends havent failed me thus far on this glorious forum.
the pro82 is only 50 eur wow the others in 100-150 range. Are they worth 2 and 3x the price respectively?
 
Last edited:

zermak

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2019
Messages
334
Likes
214
Location
Italy
I am using a Marantz PM7005 recorder output line out. I do not know how much volts is that. There is no usable info on the internet.
I missed this somehow and just got the alert now.
If that's the case then the phone output of the Maranz has a high impedance and it doesn't help to have the proper bass response of your headphones.
 

solderdude

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
6,372
Likes
11,826
Location
The Neverlands
Ill look into DT770, Custom One Pro, or Pro82 as recommends havent failed me thus far on this glorious forum.
the pro82 is only 50 eur wow the others in 100-150 range. Are they worth 2 and 3x the price respectively?
The DT770 also has a treble peak. There are solutions for this, also passive ones. Fixed slightly raised bass.
I sold mine after a few months. To me the bass was a bit one-note. Other owners never seem to notice it. As long as you don't you're good.
The Custom One Pro with stock pads doesn't have a treble peak but treble quality is not the best. Treble quality can be improved with the black velour EDT770VB pads but in return you get a (fixable) treble peak back. Custom one has adjustable bass, lowest setting is 'pinched off' and not really usable.

The Pro82 has variable bass. To me the lowest setting is slightly north of neutral already. Treble quality is not the best around but not really poor. A bit K371 type treble. The drivers are 20mW only. Make sure to get the 'better' newer black version.

The plot is from the Ultrasone Pro 900. My experiences with Ultrasone are poor. The weird driver placement probably is partly to blame.
It's an acquired taste probably because there are many folks loving the overblown (but not bleeding in the mids) bass and the 'tsssjjjhhh' treble on top of it.
 
Joined
Mar 21, 2019
Messages
90
Likes
23
The Pro82 has variable bass. Make sure to get the 'better' newer black version.
Found only one quote on aliexpress with 1.6m cable for about 63 eur. The others cost about 42 eur shipping included but come with 2.2m cable. Assume those are the lesser versions. Gonna pull the trigger if this is the one:
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32808454492.html?spm=a2g0o.cart.0.0.3ec53c0006lllL&mp=1
wanna be sure. Some of those specs says 1.6m but the advertisement picture sheets say 0.4mm x 2.2m something like that which is a flag for me. While the link above says 1.6m in the specification tab and picture sheets 0.4mm x 1.6m cable.
 
Last edited:

solderdude

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
6,372
Likes
11,826
Location
The Neverlands
The differences between the drivers are easy to see.
When it happens to be the older one you can always send it back.
 

bobbooo

Major Contributor
Joined
Aug 30, 2019
Messages
1,010
Likes
1,208
They can when you compare 2 headphones on the same rig.
No, they really can't. Even comparing two headphones on the same rig will be inaccurate if the rig does not have the same acoustic impedance as the human ear. An IEC compliant rig that does have this same acoustic impedanc will measure the actual sound pressure that reaches your ear. Anything else (like the miniDSP EARS, or your flate plate rig) will not, so cannot be used to accurately represent the frequency response you will hear from a pair of headphones. Did you actually read Oratory's post I linked to? To make sure you do, I've reproduced it below (and a more technical description of acoustic impedance can be found here).
I'm going to talk a lot about acoustic impedance, so if you're not really familiar with this term I suggest reading this short article before continuing.

This is a comparison of the same headphone (my HD800S) measured on 3 different setups.

The Orange graph is the industry-standard GRAS 43AG, an artificial ear with an anatomically correct pinna and ear canal, that has the same acoustic impedance as the human ear. This is the measurement that you can rely on, this is the sound pressure that arrives at your ear when you listen to this headphone. This is also the measurement that you can safely compare against the Harman Target, or the Diffuse-Field Target, or any other Target response.

The Blue graph is the same headphone measured on the miniDSP EARS. You can clearly see the effect of an acoustic impedance mismatch - there is a very strong resnance at 4.5 kHz, and the region from 1-3 kHz is lacking the boost it gets from a real human ear.
You can also see a drop-off above 10 kHz, likely because the microphone capsules that were used in the EARS aren't very good and only go up to 10 kHz reliably. Then again, the whole setup is incredibly inexpensive.
You can also see a misrepresented tonality from the bass to the mids - the miniDSP EARS shows a slight downward slope, which would point to a warm sounding, slightly bass-boosted headphone, when in reality the HD800S is almost perfectly linear between 10 Hz and 1 kHz. This too is a result of the acoustic impedance of the EARS not being the same as in a human ear. And the difference will be different for other sets of headphones.

Lastly the Grey graph is the same headphone measured on a Neumann KU100, which is probably the cheapest way to get a dummy head (it's still around 5000 €). But the KU100 is not designed for measurement applications, it is a binaural microphone intended for dummy head recordings of, say, an orchestra. It too does not have the acoustic impedance of a human ear, plus it has a built-in, fixed EQ. The goal was that this binaural microphone would produce a flat, linear response when placed in a diffuse field, so that when you listen to recordings made with this microphone on a diffuse-field equalized headphone (a headphone that conforms to the DF target) you will head it exactly as if your head would stand where the binaural microphone stood during the recording session.
I included the KU100 because some people use it to measure headphones. It's more reliable than the miniDSP EARS, but still has a slight impedance mismatch. All further discussion will only include the EARS and the 43AG coupler.

Now, what is the difference between measurements with the EARS and with the 43AG?
First off: It doesn't have to be the 43AG, it could be a 45CA or a KEMAR or other rigs that are compliant with the relevant IEC-norms, they will all deliver the same results (within margin of error, up to 8 kHz).
Now, I measured an HD800, an AKG K601 and a CX2.00 (insert-earphone) on the 43AG and on the EARS, this is the difference.
These are graphs obtained by subtracting the EARS measurement from the 43AG measurement. If the EARS would be as reliable as the 43AG then the result would be virtually identical for every headphone.
While the various measurements of the HD800 and HD800S produce relatively the same difference, the AKG K601 has a different "difference". It's even worse with the CX2.00 insert earphone, which has a very different acoustic impedance as over-ear headphones, and therefore interacts very differently with the acoustic impedance of the ear (or in this case: of the EARS).
The average looks like this, also shown is the deviation (grey) from the average.
The deviation is very high in the sub-bass (due to non-reliable seal), around 3 kHz (due to the wrong acoustic impedance of the pinna), and in the frequency regions 5 kHz and upwards, where deviations are much to high to obtain reliable measurements from the EARS.

The goal of all of this was to find out whether I could simply add a "compensation curve" to a measurement made with the EARS, and the result would be identical to a measurement made with the 43AG.
The answer is NO, because this compensation curve would have to be different for every headphone (depending on the acoustic impedance of the headphone).

I still tried to calculate an average of just the Over-Ear headphones - This is the compensation curve that you would have to add on average.
When you do a measurement with this compensation curve (called "calibration curve" in REW) and you see a flat linear response, then the headphone would be very close to the Harman Target.
The red graph shows the compensation curve that miniDSP provides along with every EARS rig. It looks similar to the compensation that I calculated, but it actually differs quite a lot.

But the measurements weren't done on a FP but EARS which has a Pinna ;)
I am aware the EARS has an incorrect correction file though and are not correct in an absolute way but when comparing 'similar' built/driver headphones.

I am aware of the downsides of various measurement methods. I also dare to say that even when using a 'reference' that is obtained for other measurements the 'references' are also 'off' from reality. This is why also Oratory specifies the bandwidth of 'correctness'.
I don't really agree and think above 8kHz the measurements are unreliable. Also the Harman bass-boost is something I do not entirely agree for reasons already mentioned here or there.

I don't claim my $ 4.- measurement rig is better, more accurate. My claim is that a manufacturer that sets a standard, by definition doesn't have to be an accurate standard in all conditions and that creating 'exact' EQ will certainly not result in 'accurate' results.
Merely the 'global' EQ is responsible for the sonic improvement.
Even 'similar built' headphones using the same drivers cannot be accurately compared using the miniDSP EARS or flat plate measurements, as the headphones are likely to have differing acoustic impedances themselves (e.g. different pads can cause this), and will require different compensation curves when used with rigs such as these that do not have the same acoustic impedance as the human ear. It's not a single manufacturer that's set the industry standard that headphone measurement equipment needs to have the same acoustic impedance as the ear - it's an IEC standard, based on physics and anatomy. Follow this standard and you are following the science and will get accurate results; don't follow as you're doing and your results will be unreliable and inaccurate. It's as simple as that. By the way, Oratory clearly states in his post "rigs that are compliant with the relevant IEC-norms, they will all deliver the same results (within margin of error, up to 8 kHz)," so I don't know why you're implying he thinks otherwise.

Yes, but the HE400i and HE4XX are the same geometry. In case of the measurements from Oratory different pads were used. This causes the different measurements not the difference between the EARS pinna geometry and the GRAS one... in THIS particular case.

It is very clear that the pads from Oratory's measurements differ from other measurements that show there are hardly differences between the HE400i and HE4XX. This is not a Pinna thing... small differences ... yes, the reported differences come from the pads. Same headphone, same driver, different pads.

It's a bit like comparing measurements of a DT1990 with A pads measured on rig X and DT1990 with B pads on another rig.

And yes, of course every rig needs its own compensation. And the fact that these compensations are derived with certain standard methods that are definitely NOT the same as the situation with headphones for a number of reasons is why there are such substantial (many dB differences) between different HATS and measurement methods while, very likely, all those HATS will produce correct results in the same calibration chamber.

You measure something through filters and because one has to correct those filters one 'creates' a correction obtained with described methods.
These methods will produce different results on different HATS with different headphones.
This is the part I question. Not the one operating the rig nor his expertise. I question the validity of the calibration/correction methods vs headphones.
You really need to stop disseminating false information on here, it's misleading to new and casual readers. Oratory's measurements are with original stock pads. If other measurements you've seen differ from his, this is down to either them having changed the pads (and so sound) of the headphones from the original ones they come with (and it is the latter they should be judged with), or the measuring rig used does not have the same acoustic impedance as the human ear and so is inaccurate (e.g. miniDSP EARS, flat plate), or both. And no, the 4XX and 400i are not the same headphone - they may have the same driver (although I haven't seen hard evidence to confirm this), but the enclosure, materials and yes, the pads are different, all of which contribute to them having very different frequency response. If you're questioning the industry standard method of headphone measurement and the solid acoustic science it's based on, you need a damn good reason and evidence to do so - I've not seen anything even approaching this from you so far.

The Philips seems sturdier than the HE4XX.
...
I owned the HE400i for a while but did not keep it, even with EQ it sounded too 'mushy/soft' to me. It 'smoothed over' the sound too much for me. I prefer a clearer/more forward/open sound. That is taste however and can see why people like the cheap Hifimans.
Not saying the HE4XX/HE400i aren't alternatives but there certainly are better planars. The HE4XX is entry level on many fronts.
However, to get better SQ from a planar prices go up considerably.

More bass can be had from closed headphones but there are not much headphones sounding as 'correct' as the HD600 in the closed headphones.
And now you're going back to making false assertions about the HE4XX, a headphone you've never even held in your hands let alone listened to, and once again erroneously equating it with the HE400i. How many more times do I have to tell you, they are not the same. The member specifically asked about the HE4XX, yet you're misleading them by talking about the HE400i. The HE4XX is most certainly not "entry level on many fronts", it's just fantastic value for money. You need to learn the difference, and stop letting yourself be biased by price. The HE4XX is a good choice for @Get a hearing test because the bass can be EQed up to their heart's content without incurring audible distortion due to its low distortion at those frequencies. The Philips X2HR has much higher bass distortion however, around 10 times higher in the sub-bass, so will likely produce audible distortion if EQed up. Oh and by the way, the only part of the HD600's frequency range that could be said to be correct are the central mids - the sub and lower bass are rolled off, the upper bass is raised, and upper mids / lower treble are forward.
 
Last edited:

solderdude

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
6,372
Likes
11,826
Location
The Neverlands
yeah yeah I know... :D
Don't listen to the ignorant, biased, disseminating false information spreading and false assertions making, misleading penguin.
I stepped on some long toes it seems.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 21, 2019
Messages
90
Likes
23
Yes ill look into HE4XX once they solve the build quality somewhat. This could take maybe half a year i'd guess. Headphones casually falling apart on stationary listening is funny to say the least. Vibrations must be undoing the construction lmao.
 

3125b

Senior Member
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
369
Likes
343
Location
Germany
Vibrations must be undoing the construction lmao.
Thats actually not impossible the way they are built. My 35X was put together by a drunk guy with Dremel, torch and hot snot.
IMG_20200803_000236.jpg IMG_20200803_000835.jpg IMG_20200803_000301.jpg
It works, but it's not pretty.
 

solderdude

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
6,372
Likes
11,826
Location
The Neverlands
Thats actually not impossible the way they are built. My 35X was put together by a drunk guy with Dremel, torch and hot snot.
View attachment 76355 View attachment 76356 View attachment 76357
It works, but it's not pretty.
Hey... that's funny to see. The HE35X incorporated the filter I designed for the HE350 and when I tested the prototype for the HE35X I found they had overdamped the driver which lead to compression issues. I designed a fix for it and sent the proto back (on their request) so they could verify my findings and perhaps apply the fix.
Not it seems they actually applied that fix to the production model. I never got feedback whether or not they did apply the mods.
I should update my HE35X article so I don't spread more false information :).
 

3125b

Senior Member
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
369
Likes
343
Location
Germany
Felt disk and hole-sticker?
It is indeed a relatively recent unit, bought on the 23.05.
All in all, mine looks very different to the one you had.
 

VMAT4

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2018
Messages
393
Likes
268
Location
South Central Pennsylvania
Yes ill look into HE4XX once they solve the build quality somewhat. This could take maybe half a year i'd guess. Headphones casually falling apart on stationary listening is funny to say the least. Vibrations must be undoing the construction lmao.
Enlighten me, please. I own No. 0285. And, it is solidly in one piece.
 

raistlin65

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 13, 2019
Messages
1,009
Likes
1,294
Location
Grand Rapids, MI
yeah yeah I know... :D
Don't listen to the ignorant, biased, disseminating false information spreading and false assertions making, misleading penguin.
I stepped on some long toes it seems.
I always appreciate your technical explanation of things, when I can understand them (due to my limited knowledge).

It always seems that you're trying to be as objective as possible. While also not inflexible when it comes to the introduction of new information that might change your perspective.

Keep doing it! :)
 
Top Bottom