Headphones around the $200 with 'FUN' sound signature.

[Rayman30]

Maybe this will help, I have some experience with headphones in this price range.

Hifiman HE4XX - Some upper mid range shout, bass is warm and has lots of impact and slam, treble is there but isnt the star of the show, but when EQ to Harman Target become maybe the best value I have seen. medium sound stage and imaging. Rock/Pop and live performances shine here, electronic music is glorious. This set gets you planar sound without being overly analytical.

Sennheiser HD 6XX - Slightly warm bass, well controlled but not tons of it, midrange is the star here as its velvety and textured, male vocalists are its specialty, treble is slightly recessed but natural. The focus here is on intimate sound, its quite lovely on acoustic music and singer/songwriter type tunes, Patsy Cline on these is like butter for the soul.

Meze 99 Classic - Bloated and sloppy bass performance, but tons of it, a very balanced mid range although a touch hollow and lacks details overall, surprisingly good treble performance without being fatiguing. These would ok for hip hop or techno, but I cannot recommend them for anything else, even with EQ the bass has this off putting timbre to it.

Beyerdynamic (Experienced only the DT770) - Great bass control and extention, mid range sounded a touch scooped out but this is likely due to the intense treble that they present, which I recall as detailed but could not tell if that was down to technicality of the driver or tuning. Sound stage is best of the bunch, but stock tuning may be a little intense for some people (I am one of them) id say these would be great for classic rock/pop or old country music. (I have a limited experience with these so take it with a grain of salt)

For fun, id get the HE4XX and not bother with anything else, but that's just like, my opinion... man.

 

[papachigly]

Wow! Thank you all for the input and @Rayman30 for some great info! I thought I wanted a 'fun' headphone but since listening to a comparison (which was on YT by oluv's gadgets) which incl. the Sennheiser HD 6XX, I think I now prefer a sound which is closer to what the artist originally intended it to sound like. I know it's a 180* turn around, even so, you guys have given me plenty of info and is much appreciated!

 

[Rayman30]

Wow! Thank you all for the input and @Rayman30 for some great info! I thought I wanted a 'fun' headphone but since listening to a comparison (which was on YT by oluv's gadgets) which incl. the Sennheiser HD 6XX, I think I now prefer a sound which is closer to what the artist originally intended it to sound like. I know it's a 180* turn around, even so, you guys have given me plenty of info and is much appreciated!

If your looking for reference sound quality, that is a more flat frequency curve, I am not sure any of the aforementioned headphones would really deliver that unless you use EQ. Studio monitoring headphones may be closer to "What the artist originally intended" but even that is a crapshoot.

But always welcome man, lots of options, I am sure you will end up with something great.

 

[Human Bass]

Sivga sv021

Fun, closed and under 200

US $179.00 | Sivga sv021 fone de ouvido retrátil, fone de ouvido em madeira com som de alta fidelidade https://a.aliexpress.com/_mLJzf2J

 

[ADU]

Wow! Thank you all for the input and @Rayman30 for some great info! I thought I wanted a 'fun' headphone but since listening to a comparison (which was on YT by oluv's gadgets) which incl. the Sennheiser HD 6XX, I think I now prefer a sound which is closer to what the artist originally intended it to sound like. I know it's a 180* turn around, even so, you guys have given me plenty of info and is much appreciated!

Neutral is fun imo!

If you like to listen at lower volumes though, then adding a little bit of Fletcher-Munson (basically a bit more emphasis in the bass and treble) is appropriate. And maybe even more fun, because then you can listen longer without getting as fatigued. It kinda depends on your listening habits though. And it's not somethin you want to overdo too much.

These are some other things I think make headphones fun...

GOOD SOUND:

- An open back makes the sound seem bigger, and more immersive and dimensional. If you use your headphones where there is alot of ambient noise though, then you may want a closed headphone, or even one with some type of noise cancellation to isolate the sound a little better.

- Good extension (but not over-emphasis) in both the bass and treble. You want a little air in the treble, as well as a bit of thump down low. It is harder to get really good extension and thump in the bass with an open headphone though than with a closed HP. Open planars seem to be somewhat better for this than open dynamic headphones though, because they can extend deeper into the bass. And also be EQ-ed higher in the bass, without distortion becoming noticeable.

- Good "slam" (or what Resolve calls "macro-contrasts"). Higher-end dynamic headphones generally seem to be better for this than planars. I think Resolve also believes that a lower frequency main driver resonance can contribute to this, at least on some planar headphones.

- Good driver symmetry. The sound in the headphone's left and right channels should be the same volume, and timbrally very similar, so they measure about the same in frequency response. Otherwise the stereo imaging can be shifted to one side, or compromised in other ways. Some of the headphones mentioned here have single-sided cables, for example, which (imho) can sometimes result in noticeable imbalances between the left and right drivers. Headphones with two-sided cables can have imbalances as well though. Sometimes these imbalances can easily be fixed with just a left-right stereo balance control on a player, DAC or amp. And sometimes it's more difficult, if the imbalances are not consistent across the entire frequency range.

- Low distortion. Some people don't mind a bit of distortion in their sound. And may even prefer a somewhat softer, fuzzier sound. But lower distortion can result in better clarity and resolution in the headphone's stereo imaging. And a little greater sense of space, since the spacial cues (if any) in the music are likely to be more sharply and clearly defined... which is even more fun than fuzz most of the time imo. Planars used to have an edge in this area. Most of the higher end dynamic headphones have pretty low distortion too though, due to stiffer materials used in the diaphragms, and better driver design. Proper impedance bridging / damping between the headphone and amp can also help. Especially on some lower end headphones, where distortion in the headphone's drivers can sometimes be a little more noticeable.

- A clean, tidy, and fairly quick impulse response (aka envelope/attack/sustain/decay/waterfall response). This also helps to improve a headphone's imaging imo, and to move the sound more outside your head. Dynamic HPs are usually a bit faster than planars, I believe. But the latter also seem to have improved in recent years.

- Smooth response in bass and mids with no glaring resonances. This gives the sound a more "liquid" quality. And generally better timbral accuracy (in conjunction with a neutral tonal balance), which brings out more nuance and detail in the sound. Some bumpiness in the treble is normal. But there are some bumps and dips which can be good there. And others which are not so good. And telling them apart can be somewhat difficult for someone who is not as experienced in reading/understanding frequency response plots. On some headphones, EQ can be used to improve this.

- Angled drivers. This seems to also enhance the stereo imaging a bit, since the sound is coming a little more from the front, like the sound from a pair of speakers in a room. In most headphones though (esp. lower cost ones), the drivers will simply sit flat against the side of your head, with the sound coming more from the sides.

GOOD ERGONOMICS:

- Good comfort, fit, and adjustability so you can listen for longer periods without discomfort.

- Good construction and materials that are easy to clean, and also replace if they break or wear out. If you are going to invest a few $100 in a pair of decent headphones, then you want them to last. And don't want to be doing continuous maintenance on them. And don't want them looking like hell from the amount of wear after a number of months of heavy use. You should also be able to easily get replacement parts (such as new pads for the earcups and headband), when they are needed.

- Good (detachable) cables that don't get in your way, or add too much excessive weight to the headphones. As mentioned above my preference is for double-sided cables, rather than single, since I've frequently encountered noticeable imbalances on headphones with the latter.

- Alot of people prefer wireless headphones, btw, because they have no cables. And provide more options for connectivity than passive wired headphones. Wired headphones allow you to try different types of amplifiers (and DACs) though, which many audiophiles like.

EQ generally works a little better on closed headphones than open ones, particularly in the bass. Though it can work ok even there on some open planar magnetics as mentioned above. EQ generally works best though if the headphone's response is already fairly close to your preferred response. Or a neutral response.

And yeah, I realize that the above is probably alot to dump in a relative newbie's lap. But maybe now you have a little better idea of a few other things to maybe look for when shopping for some better HPs.

You don't necessarily need all the above to get the most fun out of a headphone. And some users will tend to prioritize some of the above differently than others. I tend to prize things like comfort and good construction a little more than some of the other items, for example. Though good sound is also important to me as well.

If I had the $$ though, then I'd want pretty much the whole package. (And will probably think of a few more things after posting this.)

 

[Patrick1958]

Philips X2HR

 

[LTig]

K371 | Over-ear, closed-back, foldable studio headphones

Over-ear, closed-back, foldable studio headphones

www.akg.com

These ought to be "fun"... And measure well... And less than your range...

I second that. The K371 makes a lot of fun if you like really deep bass (not overblown Dr. Dre type middle bass). It's also available in a blutooth version (which I own) so easy to use with modern smart phones missing analog outputs.

 

[eddantes]

I second that. The K371 makes a lot of fun if you like really deep bass (not overblown Dr. Dre type middle bass). It's also available in a blutooth version (which I own) so easy to use with modern smart phones missing analog outputs.

If I could (they don't seem to be availlable in Canada), I'd be buying the JBL Tune 710BT.

Dr. Olive measured them and they ended up with one of the highest predicted preference scores he's had... All at around $80.

 

[papachigly]

I had the chance to try on the JBL 710BT today and to be honest, they didn't really 'wow' me. I prefer or rather I seem used to a larger ear cup. As I'll be using them at home, I can get away with a larger form factor.
I came across the V-Moda Crossfade m-100 Masters. Any thoughts on these?

 

[usern]

I used Crossfade M100 (non Master) for a long time with minimal EQ. They had the sound I liked the most out of headphones I've owned. But I specifically got them for bass. And I boosted it even further.

But I had to ditch them because they started to cause ear problems (hot and sweaty inside cups).

 

[ADU]

The couple of V-Modas I've tried on at GC also seemed to clamp fairly tight.

Clamping force is something I forgot to mention in my comments above on ergonomics. On-ears that clamp tight can be particularly uncomfortable after awhile. And I think the V-Modas would have to fall into that category for me, because I couldn't really get my ears inside their rather tiny cups.

The sound sig on the M-100 also looks fairly V-shaped btw. And maybe also a bit uneven and lacking a bit of detail in some spots in the treble. That could probably be tweaked a little with an EQ though, if necessary.

 

[ADU]

I had the chance to try on the JBL 710BT today and to be honest, they didn't really 'wow' me. I prefer or rather I seem used to a larger ear cup. As I'll be using them at home, I can get away with a larger form factor.

I'd be curious to hear some more of your impression on the JBL. Based solely on the above plot, they appear to have pretty decent mids. They look too rolled off in the high treble though. So the air and very high frequency timbral detail may not come through so well on them.

The Harman target is actually too rolled off in the high treble for a neutral response imo. So I'd expect a more neutral headphone to actually have a bit more treble than the target in a few spots above 10 kHz. There probably should be a notch in the headphone's response at around 9.5 to 10k though. And maybe also at around 15k and 20-21k, if these graphs work similarly to Oratory's GRAS plots.

The sub-bass also looks a bit too rolled off. Though it's hard to tell from just one graph. This headphone seems to be lacking some extension in both the sub-bass and high treble though, based on that one graph.

I think some of the newer JBL's include either some on-board EQ features. Or the ability to use such features on some other devices. So you could probably tweak the response more to your liking on some of them. I don't know if the 710BT falls into that category though. That might be a good feature to look for on a wireless digital headphone though.

The cups look pretty small. So I assume this is also an on-ear (which would not be my first choice for home use because of the potential comfort and clamping issues.)

I don't see any other graphs for these yet on ASR, Rtings, Crinacle, or Oratory's graphing tools btw.

 

[ADU]

If I could (they don't seem to be availlable in Canada), I'd be buying the JBL Tune 710BT.

Dr. Olive measured them and they ended up with one of the highest predicted preference scores he's had... All at around $80.

This is something I probably should have also mentioned here. But I don't put too much stock in either Harman's FR rating system. Or the Harman compensated graphs. Because I think there are some spots, particularly in the treble and upper mids where their target is a bit off. And where a neutral headphone should deviate from their response curve.

 

[ADU]

Bearing in mind I'm going from a Superlux HD681 to whatever you guys suggest

The Superlux HPs you are currently using appear rather bright in the lower part of the treble btw. Though it looks like the response can be improved to a good degree, just by using the pleather (rather than velour) pads. Without the pleather pads, you haven't got a whole lot of bass to help balance out the treble info.

If this is the type of sound signature that you are used to, it may also take a little time to adjust to a more neutral (and accurate imo) sounding headphone. Because your ears have probably adjusted somewhat to all of that treble detail. This is something you might also want to bear in mind when doing some of your listening tests.

I would imagine that you don't try to crank up the volume too much on these either, because of the pronounced treble.

 

[MayaTlab]

I had the chance to try on the JBL 710BT today and to be honest, they didn't really 'wow' me. I prefer or rather I seem used to a larger ear cup.

​

Yep people with big ears stay the * away. In my case they barely fit in there. Clamp force is too low to compress the pads enough to fully seal them against my head (or the pads' foam / square design is too stiff vs. the clamping force, depends on your point of view) - at least for now, I'll wait to see how the pads "break in", as I've learnt my lesson with the X65 : https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...hi-x65-open-back-announced.23380/#post-900059​

​

Based solely on the above plot

I would really encourage people to look at these graphs, particularly at the extremities, more as a suggestion rather than something that is to be nitpicked to such an extent .
I've measured them with various in-ear mics (DIY probe, open / blocked ear canal entrance, open / blocked in concha mics), and while I'll wait for several weeks to accrue more data, as is usually the case so far I can only conclude that measurements made on industry standard rigs should be interpreted with more or less temperance depending on the range of spectrum under examination and many other factors .
Even with, as of now, a sub-optimal (but fairly constant) seal, I like them a lot, but not because they happen to score well on a Harman compliant rig - as all recent Harman HPs do anyway -, but rather because of how they actually behave on my own head.

I think some of the newer JBL's include either some on-board EQ features. Or the ability to use such features on some other devices. So you could probably tweak the response more to your liking on some of them. I don't know if the 710BT falls into that category though.

Nope, the JBL Headphones app doesn't work with these.

The cups look pretty small. So I assume this is also an on-ear (which would not be my first choice for home use because of the potential comfort and clamping issues.)

It's an over-ears if you have small ears, and definitely an on-ears if you haven't . The cups / pads design is quite poor, but at least they have a traditional yoke with enough range of motion.

If one gets a good seal with them, I can see how they should definitely be considered for this thread's subject.

​

​

 

[solderdude]

Coming from unmodified HD681 and 'fun sound' I would suggest the DT990. The DT990, however, does not play nearly as loud at the same volume setting.

 

[ziddy76]

None of the headphones you got listed in the OP IMO are "fun" headphones.
- Fun headphones have something wrong with them. They are not neutral or the greatest travesty to headphone hobby, Harman poop.
- I think they got an emphasis as forward mid for that excitement and emphasis on vocals or are V shaped for that extra pump on Metal or EDM.

Most "fun" I had owned were Audio Technica AD900 for open, ridiculously fun headphones for rock and EDM I mostly listened to. For closed, SRH840 were a lot of fun.

 

[papachigly]

As I mentioned before in the comments, I thought I wanted a fun headphone but since listening to a comparison which included the HD600, I think I just want a solid upgrade from my Superlux HD681. My logic for thinking I wanted a 'fun' headphone was a boost in low and high frequencies to help out when listening to movies. But man, those HD600s on the test (all be it on YT) were so much better than the AKG (I think it was a 701) it was a battle of the classics. I just preferred the representation of the sound track on the HD600s. There seemed to be added coloration on the others I didn't care for.

Edit: I have just come across the Senheiser HD560s - It looks fairly promising and paired with a fiio btr5.. could be the ticket!

 

[eddantes]

Coming from unmodified HD681 and 'fun sound' I would suggest the DT990. The DT990, however, does not play nearly as loud at the same volume setting.

If anyone here is an authority on the question it's @solderdude . You can take this opinion to the bank... Errr that is if we all agree on what "fun" means. (In case you don't know I belive this is @solderdude 's site https://diyaudioheaven.wordpress.com/schematics/headphone/)

 

[solderdude]

From @papachigly 's last post it seems he no longer wants a 'higher quality' HD681 but something less colored closer to neutral (HD600) but with extended bass. OP seems to have auditioned HD600 and K70(something) in some way.
The HD560S does fill that ticket.

And yes, there is the definition of 'fun' which might not have the same meaning for everyone.
To me it means: Lively (so not boring or lacking in dynamics), elevated bass and elevated upper treble (fake detail). As OP has the HD681 and describes it as fun but looks for higher quality then DT990 fits that bill.

The part that confuses me is this:

But man, those HD600s on the test (all be it on YT) were so much better than the AKG (I think it was a 701)

Did the OP listen to a HD600 and K70(x) while listening to YT somewhere or did he see a YT video comparing the 2?
In the latter case, when he did this on good speakers and with a properly corrected recording on a HATS (debatable) or did OP listen to a comparison via his HD681 ?
In the latter case he did not listen to the HD600 but to a HD681 with low bass rolled off. The K70something will not have sounded like a real K70something.