Hifiman Sundara Review (headphone)

[odyo]

I have both of those headphones and they are nothing alike. Neither sound or comfortability are similar.

I've used M50X like 5 years ago or something like that so forgive me if i remember it wrong. In detail, yes they are different but in general feel i feel they are similar. Their fit is similar. Stiff, clampy and almost on ear like (my ears aren't all that big but still). Sound is also very condensed and aggressive. Like an iem, very close to your eardrums. Poor soundstage. I'm not a user of HD6X0 series headphones so i have a bit higher standard than others when it comes to soundstage. Most audiophiles familiar with and exposed to the HD6X0 series headphones tend to have less soundstage pickiness.

Now i checked the graphs on crin's site and yeah they are similar outside of closed back bass response of M50X.

 

[Gene LeClair]

I've used M50X like 5 years ago or something like that so forgive me if i remember it wrong. In detail, yes they are different but in general feel i feel they are similar. Their fit is similar. Stiff, clampy and almost on ear like (my ears aren't all that big but still). Sound is also very condensed and aggressive. Like an iem, very close to your eardrums. Poor soundstage. I'm not a user of HD6X0 series headphones so i have a bit higher standard than others when it comes to soundstage. Most audiophiles familiar with and exposed to the HD6X0 series headphones tend to have less soundstage pickiness.
View attachment 187684
Now i checked the graphs on crin's site and yeah they are similar outside of closed back bass response of M50X.

What? They're not very similar headphones at all. I'm not sure if you're joking or being serious. You're using the term "if I remember" a lot in your posts. You can't compare headphones by memory.

When it comes to frequency response, headphone designers often target the same curve. So if they do their job well, the graph should look similar for each headphone. But you can see clear differences in it. Not mention that the soundstage of these two sounds nothing alike. I mean, the other is a closed design after all.

When it comes to comfortability, we each have our own preferences. For me Sundara feels less clampy and breaths much better. It's the most comfortable headphone I have.

 

[Gene LeClair]

From my memory, the difference is quite huge between this and Ananda. Like it or hate it, Ananda have a magic. Sundara have a bit better dynamics that's all. Technical performance and soundstage quite a bit better on Ananda. Ananda also sounds kinda beautiful. It has some kind of sweetness to it. Sundara is more aggressive but in a bad way i feel. Ananda offers a unique and impressive performance. Sundara sounds pretty average. The soundstage is pretty restricted and every instrument fights for their space. It's like a chair catching game.

From my memory, DT 1990 destroys this.

See, from your memory.

I have no experience with Anandas or DT1990, both should be good headphones. But here's two comparisons:

"The HiFiMan Sundara 2020 and the HiFiMan Ananda have different strengths, and you may prefer either one, depending on your needs. The Sundara have a slightly more neutral sound profile, which some listeners may like. On the other hand, the Ananda are much more breathable, have significantly better build quality, and come with an extra audio cable. They also have a much better passive soundstage performance."

https://www.rtings.com/headphones/t...undara-2020/670/24884?usage=19&threshold=0.10

"The HiFiMan Sundara 2020 are better for neutral sound than the Beyerdynamic DT 1990 PRO. The HiFiMan have a much more neutral treble response, which some listeners may prefer. They have a better passive soundstage performance and much better frequency response consistency. They're also more comfortable. On the other hand, while both pairs have an open-back design, the Beyerdynamic's sound profile has a much more accurate bass response, which some may prefer. They also trap less heat against your ears."
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/t...undara-2020/628/24884?usage=19&threshold=0.10

 

[Ken Tajalli]

Just dropping in.
Sundara 2020 should be compared with headphones of similar price, not stuff at twice the price.
At £299 (Amazon UK) they are just about peerless, fantastic? No Ultra HiFi? No . . . .
I have one, also have the Edition XS (at £450 a better value), also have had Beyers and Focal Clear - Sundara 2020 compared to all of those offers very good value.
If you want better, Ananda or Edition XS cost more, sound better.
Lets not knock it down, and keep things in context.

 

[odyo]

When it comes to frequency response, headphone designers often target the same curve. So if they do their job well, the graph should look similar for each headphone. But you can see clear differences in it. Not mention that the soundstage of these two sounds nothing alike. I mean, the other is a closed design after all.

Not at all. Also closed back doesn't mean smaller soundstage. DT 770 have noticeably bigger soundstage than either Sundara or 1990.

See, from your memory.

I have no experience with Anandas or DT1990, both should be good headphones. But here's two comparisons:

"The HiFiMan Sundara 2020 and the HiFiMan Ananda have different strengths, and you may prefer either one, depending on your needs. The Sundara have a slightly more neutral sound profile, which some listeners may like. On the other hand, the Ananda are much more breathable, have significantly better build quality, and come with an extra audio cable. They also have a much better passive soundstage performance."

https://www.rtings.com/headphones/t...undara-2020/670/24884?usage=19&threshold=0.10

"The HiFiMan Sundara 2020 are better for neutral sound than the Beyerdynamic DT 1990 PRO. The HiFiMan have a much more neutral treble response, which some listeners may prefer. They have a better passive soundstage performance and much better frequency response consistency. They're also more comfortable. On the other hand, while both pairs have an open-back design, the Beyerdynamic's sound profile has a much more accurate bass response, which some may prefer. They also trap less heat against your ears."
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/t...undara-2020/628/24884?usage=19&threshold=0.10

I wouldn't use Rtings as reference but whatever floats your boat. Rtings doesn't say anything contradicts my impressions either. Except the comfort of Sundara which is horrible for me. I wouldn't use Sundara even if you pay me money. Sound is good but it's energetic and sharp/bright so it depends on my mood. I generally prefer laid back spaced out sound. I like energetic headphones too but i wouldn't wear them all day. As an energetic type of headphone i find 1990 better but Sundara have better midrange detail i think. I give bass, treble, soundstage, imaging, speed, dynamics, timbre to 1990, vocal texture, detail to Sundara.

If you like the Sundara that's ok. You don't need to be defensive about it. I've shared my opinions and experience with it. This hobby is mostly subjective. Reviewers shouldn't dictate what you should like or don't like. Form your own opinion.

Just dropping in.
Sundara 2020 should be compared with headphones of similar price, not stuff at twice the price.
At £299 (Amazon UK) they are just about peerless, fantastic? No Ultra HiFi? No . . . .
I have one, also have the Edition XS (at £450 a better value), also have had Beyers and Focal Clear - Sundara 2020 compared to all of those offers very good value.
If you want better, Ananda or Edition XS cost more, sound better.
Lets not knock it down, and keep things in context.

True. I approached it from this angle because of my older experience and Sundara vs Ananda is a hot topic. At this price, if you are looking for this type of experience, Sundara is probably unbeatable. 1990 is more expensive especially in US but i think it's better. It also has just FAR BETTER build quality and long term reliability as well as good box content(alternative cables, pads and carrying bag), and better spare part business etc...
I suspect Sundara has some unit variation because i wasn't really expecting this much treble. Only Amir's measurement shows this.

 

[Gene LeClair]

I wouldn't use Rtings as reference but whatever floats your boat.

Do you think there's something wrong with Rtings? Their reviews seem to be based on measurements rather than subjective opinions, so I'd take their review over yours.

Rtings doesn't say anything contradicts my impressions either. Except the comfort of Sundara which is horrible for me. I wouldn't use Sundara even if you pay me money. Sound is good but it's energetic and sharp/bright so it depends on my mood. I generally prefer laid back spaced out sound. I like energetic headphones too but i wouldn't wear them all day. As an energetic type of headphone i find 1990 better but Sundara have better midrange detail i think. I give bass, treble, soundstage, imaging, speed, dynamics, timbre to 1990, vocal texture, detail to Sundara.

If you like the Sundara that's ok. You don't need to be defensive about it. I've shared my opinions and experience with it. This hobby is mostly subjective. Reviewers shouldn't dictate what you should like or don't like. Form your own opinion.

I'm not being defensive about anything, I just wanted to point out, that what you're saying here is inaccurate and subjective. I happen to have those two headphones which you described as similar from your "memory". And they just aren't.

We might both have different subjective preferences and it's okay if you don't like Sundaras. But there are things that can be measured objectively. This forum is supposed to be oriented to science and objectivity.

 

[Gene LeClair]

Not at all. Also closed back doesn't mean smaller soundstage. DT 770 have noticeably bigger soundstage than either Sundara or 1990.

Well, I don't really mean to stalk on you, but is the part about soundstage your subjective view too?

I have no experience with DT770, but Rtings says, that Sundara has bigger soundstage.

"The HiFiMan Sundara 2020 are better for neutral sound than the Beyerdynamic DT 770 PRO. The HiFiMan have an open-back design. They're more comfortable, deliver sound much more consistently, and have a much more open, spacious soundstage. On the other hand, the Beyerdynamic are closed-back headphones with fantastic bass accuracy, so your music has more thump and rumble, which some may prefer. They're also more breathable and have a better build quality."
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/t...undara-2020/440/24884?usage=19&threshold=0.10

Once again, I have no personal bias here. I'm just a guy reading the internet and trying to get a objective comparisons between headphones.

 

[Rayman30]

In response to Odyo and Gene LeClair, arguing subjective nuance, and expecting an objective result is an epic waist of time imo. I am sure Odyo has tons of nuanced opinions that would make for an interesting conversation over a fine pour of whiskey, in order to prevent the risk of "paralysis by analysis" all of the aforementioned headphones are great for various things, arguing over it is a zero sum game. Quite simply there is no way to know what you will like better, maybe buy them all then return the ones you dislike?

However, Odyo you asserted Rtings.com was not credible, I await the evidence for this claim.

 

[MrBrainwash]

Which Dekoni pads did you use for your 1990? I heard the Elite Velour is objectively the best match for them. Also, have you tried any Dekoni pads for your Sundara?

Sorry for late response. I don't know if they are objectively the best but yeah I have Elite Velour, they sound smoother than two others but the driver is more distant from the ear, and this give impression of bigger soundstage but at the same time pushed back midrange. I don't have preferences I like the fact I have 3 headphones in one pair But standard pads need EQ for sure, especially Analytical pads. Sundara sound more tonally correct, but the thing is they are a lot different from each other and that's why I don't even see a reason to compare them. For me Sundara is objectively and subjectively better but it can't do the sound like DT1990 - in almost 3D fashion. These are different headphones for different purposes (and moods).

 

[staticV3]

Which Dekoni pads did you use for your 1990? I heard the Elite Velour is objectively the best match for them. Also, have you tried any Dekoni pads for your Sundara?

Luckily, Dekoni did measurements of the 1990 with all their pads, so that we don't have to rely on hearsay:

Beyerdynamic DT1990 Measurements | Dekoni Audio

Dekoni Audio is pleased to share a “deep dive” look into our Beyerdynamic DT Premium line of Earpads, specifically tuned to elevate your listening experience. We start with comfort, using our soft, high density, slow rebound memory foam for an extra plush experience that conforms to the shape...

dekoniaudio.com

 

[Jimbob54]

Luckily, Dekoni did measurements of the 1990 with all their pads, so that we don't have to rely on hearsay:

Beyerdynamic DT1990 Measurements | Dekoni Audio

Dekoni Audio is pleased to share a “deep dive” look into our Beyerdynamic DT Premium line of Earpads, specifically tuned to elevate your listening experience. We start with comfort, using our soft, high density, slow rebound memory foam for an extra plush experience that conforms to the shape...

dekoniaudio.com

Give it a couple of hours and someone will tell you how Dekomi measurements can't be relied on and how aftermarket pads are basically the devil's creation.

 

[odyo]

Well, I don't really mean to stalk on you, but is the part about soundstage your subjective view too?

I have no experience with DT770, but Rtings says, that Sundara has bigger soundstage.

"The HiFiMan Sundara 2020 are better for neutral sound than the Beyerdynamic DT 770 PRO. The HiFiMan have an open-back design. They're more comfortable, deliver sound much more consistently, and have a much more open, spacious soundstage. On the other hand, the Beyerdynamic are closed-back headphones with fantastic bass accuracy, so your music has more thump and rumble, which some may prefer. They're also more breathable and have a better build quality."
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/t...undara-2020/440/24884?usage=19&threshold=0.10

Once again, I have no personal bias here. I'm just a guy reading the internet and trying to get a objective comparisons between headphones.

It seems you are a bit obsessed with objectivity/subjectivity. Maybe more time and experience may change your mind. In that specific test, Sundara score higher openness and acoustic space excitation which skews the result. Open back headphones will always score better there. PRTF Size and Distance would be more accurate to judge what i'm talking about but even that isn't a reliable metric. Otherwise we would all just measure that and have better understanding about soundstage. Sundara have better score than even X2HR and AKG K702 which is ridiculous. Better score than DT 1990 too.

However, Odyo you asserted Rtings.com was not credible, I await the evidence for this claim.

It's not about credibility. I will not go into argument here. I think it's obvious what i meant.

Which Dekoni pads did you use for your 1990? I heard the Elite Velour is objectively the best match for them. Also, have you tried any Dekoni pads for your Sundara?

I've used Dekoni Elite Velour. It doesn't fix treble. It adds a bit more sub bass and slight a bit more soundstage but takes away from imaging and precision. Sound little more blunted. Not as comfy as analytic pads but more comfy than balanced pads.

 

[Leiker535]

So i got a chance to listen the famous Sundara. My first impression is disappointing to be honest. Quite bright, sharp and shouty. I need some adaptation to judge it's technicalities but it didn't seem that good. It's quite forward headphone with very upfront vocals and odd treble peaks. I've checked the measurements in all websites and every measurement except amir's indicates almost perfect adherence to harman target which i don't hear at all. Amir's measurement more on point with that treble peak. Mind you i'm a guy who listens and loves DT 770 so i'm not bright sensitive at all. Soundstage is quite small, nowhere near DT 770. Sub bass isn't there. Comfort is bad. Quite high clamping force and very stiff feeling doesn't blend in and conform your head. Bad build, feels like it will age pretty bad pretty quick.

From my memory, the difference is quite huge between this and Ananda. Like it or hate it, Ananda have a magic. Sundara have a bit better dynamics that's all. Technical performance and soundstage quite a bit better on Ananda. Ananda also sounds kinda beautiful. It has some kind of sweetness to it. Sundara is more aggressive but in a bad way i feel. Ananda offers a unique and impressive performance. Sundara sounds pretty average. The soundstage is pretty restricted and every instrument fights for their space. It's like a chair catching game.

From my memory, DT 1990 destroys this.

I was a bit tired and sensitive during my time with the Sundara. I will give it more time later and try some EQ too. This is just my very first impression.

I think the hot treble sensation is very due to the Hifiman hotness over 10khz. Some people are more sensitive to it than others, most importantly younger people vs older. It's funny though since you have the Ananda and those have it even worse:

Coming from a Harman compliant 6XX (with further EQing by Oratories measurements) to the Hifiman EDXS, which measures almost identically to the Ananda FR wise), it was the first thing I noticed, aside from the vocal thinness due to the slope at 2k; it still is what makes me not use them on my vinyl rig, where I can't EQ.

The soundstage "weirdness" you mentioned may be due also to driver tallness and difference, as the Ananda pads are deeper, and thus it behaves more akin to a "earspeaker". Anecdotically, all my friends that I showed the EDXS to noticed it, and some of them even preferred the 6XX to the Hifimans due to it being more "headphone like".

 

[odyo]

I think the hot treble sensation is very due to the Hifiman hotness over 10khz. Some people are more sensitive to it than others, most importantly younger people vs older. It's funny though since you have the Ananda and those have it even worse:

View attachment 187811

Coming from a Harman compliant 6XX (with further EQing by Oratories measurements) to the Hifiman EDXS, which measures almost identically to the Ananda FR wise), it was the first thing I noticed, aside from the vocal thinness due to the slope at 2k; it still is what makes me not use them on my vinyl rig, where I can't EQ.

The soundstage "weirdness" you mentioned may be due also to driver tallness and difference, as the Ananda pads are deeper, and thus it behaves more akin to a "earspeaker". Anecdotically, all my friends that I showed the EDXS to noticed it, and some of them even preferred the 6XX to the Hifimans due to it being more "headphone like".

I think it's more about aggressiveness of the sound. Sundara sound more forward with a more cramped soundstage. Also if you check Amir's measurement in the first page, his unit has a bad peak which isn't there on crin's measurement. Distortion looks bad there as well.

Ananda's problem is that scoop around 1.5k and it's contrast to 3-4k. Once you fix that, it doesn't sound thin, it starts to sound rich and sweet. It also has way more detailed bass and impressive sub bass. Sundara thump a bit better but it's a monotonous thump compared to that. Ananda is bright but inoffensive especially once you fix the scoop. I even add high shelf boost to spice things up and add more punch to treble sometimes.

 

[Gene LeClair]

It seems you are a bit obsessed with objectivity/subjectivity.

Subjectively earth can be flat. That's pretty much the level where some of the audiophile discussions are at.

In that specific test, Sundara score higher openness and acoustic space excitation which skews the result. Open back headphones will always score better there. PRTF Size and Distance would be more accurate to judge what i'm talking about but even that isn't a reliable metric.

Both PRFT size and distance are taken into account by rtings, when they measure soundstage. I hope you read their methodology from the headphone comparisons I linked.

Sundara have better score than even X2HR and AKG K702 which is ridiculous. Better score than DT 1990 too.

What exactly is ridiculous about that? Sundaras have better PRTF size and distance, than X2HR. And better size than K702, though lower distance.

 

[fragzone]

Hello all. Been enjoying my Sundara for about a year now on a JDS atom amp and OL Dac.

I have been thinking for a while to get a portable amp for them, sourced by a sony nw-a55. Last night I thought what the hell, I'll just try run them straight from this tiny DAP in bed. I was pleased to find that it could produce more than enough volume, didn't even have to max it out. I have always been under the impression that higher impedance headphones in general benefit from more wattage, but it got me thinking. If the volume is directly correlated to the voltage coming out of any device, what difference does it make? (not taking into account the source). I have seen claims that some lower powered sources can't 'take command' of the drivers as well, usually in relation to bass output and incisiveness. I can't see how this would be true when either device is putting out the same voltage. Excuse my ignorance.

 

[staticV3]

I have seen claims that some lower powered sources can't 'take command' of the drivers as well, usually in relation to bass output and incisiveness.

The answer (I think) is Equal loudness contours.
A more powerful amp allows for higher volume.
To retain the same perceived tonality when increasing volume, bass needs to be reduced.
But that's not what's happening. People buy powerful Amps, turn up the volume like they couldn't have with their previous gear, but fail to compensate for equal loudness.
As a result, bass sounds louder and so they conclude: you need a powerful amp for good bass.
In my experience, all tonality differences vanish once levels are matched.
.1V sounds the same out of an Amp capable of 1V and one capable of 10, at least in my experience.

 

[Rayman30]

Hello all. Been enjoying my Sundara for about a year now on a JDS atom amp and OL Dac.

I have been thinking for a while to get a portable amp for them, sourced by a sony nw-a55. Last night I thought what the hell, I'll just try run them straight from this tiny DAP in bed. I was pleased to find that it could produce more than enough volume, didn't even have to max it out. I have always been under the impression that higher impedance headphones in general benefit from more wattage, but it got me thinking. If the volume is directly correlated to the voltage coming out of any device, what difference does it make? (not taking into account the source). I have seen claims that some lower powered sources can't 'take command' of the drivers as well, usually in relation to bass output and incisiveness. I can't see how this would be true when either device is putting out the same voltage. Excuse my ignorance.

I briefly had Aeon RT closed back headphones, when switching between 3 amps (Element II, Schiit Magni 3+ and Topping A30 Pro) which offer 1.3W, 2.6W and 6W of power, I could tell a difference, especially moving from the Element II to the Topping, even when cranked up on the Element II, it was loud, but it did not seem to have the same level of body or authority, almost as if it was lacking in dynamics. I have experienced this time and time again with different setups, it absolutely could be my imagination, but it does affect my decision making. I have owned the Sundara a couple times, it sounded pretty much the same on all my sources, so I am not surprised by your findings.

 

[RHO]

I briefly had Aeon RT closed back headphones, when switching between 3 amps (Element II, Schiit Magni 3+ and Topping A30 Pro) which offer 1.3W, 2.6W and 6W of power, I could tell a difference, especially moving from the Element II to the Topping, even when cranked up on the Element II, it was loud, but it did not seem to have the same level of body or authority, almost as if it was lacking in dynamics. I have experienced this time and time again with different setups, it absolutely could be my imagination, but it does affect my decision making. I have owned the Sundara a couple times, it sounded pretty much the same on all my sources, so I am not surprised by your findings.

Maybe the Element II could not deliver the current the DCA asks at high volume? The DCA is a very low impedance headphone. When you drive it hard, bass notes will require much more current than when you drive a high impedance headphone. The result could be that the voltage will drop suddenly when there is not enough current available.

 

[Ken Tajalli]

Hello all. Been enjoying my Sundara for about a year now on a JDS atom amp and OL Dac.

I have been thinking for a while to get a portable amp for them, sourced by a sony nw-a55. Last night I thought what the hell, I'll just try run them straight from this tiny DAP in bed. I was pleased to find that it could produce more than enough volume, didn't even have to max it out. I have always been under the impression that higher impedance headphones in general benefit from more wattage, but it got me thinking. If the volume is directly correlated to the voltage coming out of any device, what difference does it make? (not taking into account the source). I have seen claims that some lower powered sources can't 'take command' of the drivers as well, usually in relation to bass output and incisiveness. I can't see how this would be true when either device is putting out the same voltage. Excuse my ignorance.

Wattage depends on two! Voltage and current or impedance.
More impedance means less current (it impedes current flow), means less power.
If you stick a piece of wire (low impedance) across car battery posts, it produces enogh power to melt the wire.
Same battery connected to a car bulb (higher impedance), just lights it up and goes on for hours!