• 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!

Hifiman Sundara Review (headphone)

ZolaIII

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
4,071
Likes
2,410
@PeteL try to read what you wrote please! If it pushes it to 114 dB (didn't clip and has more headroom) and Sandra is actually rated to 104.52 dB/V SPL that should answer it. How ever as I stated they have considerable amount of distortion (4 dB) in low bass for planars at 104 dB (which you might even use on so high lv sometimes for sakes of better recorded symphonic peaces and analitic purposes) adding it more with EQ (which those do need). That ain't really good.
 

ZolaIII

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
4,071
Likes
2,410
How do you know that?

At 1kHz, but yes that is a better indicator that the fact that it can push them to 114 dB SPL
He drove HE6*with exactly the same setup (all of them actually) that's 3x power requirement.
 
H

Hifihedgehog

Guest
Did any HP tested so far, passed the test and was good enough to recommend (without EQ) ?
Recently: K371, Aeon RT, HE-6, HD650 and a few more. Have a look at the Review Index:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?pages/HeadphoneReview/
I would take a slightly different stance here. Judging from the frequency graphs, if the Sundara needs EQ, the HD 650 minimally needs it just as much for the bass and quite a bit more for the treble though in the totally opposite direction. I have not heard the Sundara yet but I have heard the HD 650 and while the sound response would rightly be described as EXTREMELY immaculate, it has treble reluctance which, for some, can take quite some getting used to.

Let's compare the HD 650's response to the Sundara's based off the graphs. First, its treble looks to be far more curtailed (5 dB and >10 dB nulls) in the mid to upper treble regions compared to Sundara's visibly mild treble accentuation and otherwise more neutral tracking. On the other end of the spectrum, both show the same shortfall in the deep bass between the two followed by the Sundara's 2-3 dB hump in the midbass (40-80 Hz) edging that region closer to neutral than the HD 650.

So bear in mind that---and I am not trying to put words in anyone's mouth here so please forgive me as I am not trying to not step on anyone's toes so, Amir, please feel free to correct me if you feel I am wrong in this perception--given the choice, my experience here leads me to believe that Amir generally takes the sin of omission of treble over the sin of commission. I am a treble head which I happily admit so I lean the opposite direction in the continuum of preferences. Likewise, I would admit that I would take a slight smile curve over a slight frown curve if I had to pick from the two.

This is hopefully a diplomatic or roundabout way of saying I would recommend to take the time to look at the graphs first and see if the headphones match your preferences and not just go off the simple nay/yea EQ recommendations. Flipping this around and applying that advice here, using solely the frequency graphs as an indicator of expected frequency performance, if the HD 650 does not need an EQ, I think it would be a fair assessment to say that the Sundara would seem to need it even less so if a more neutral or a neutral bright sound is your goal.

1618576696923.png


1618576852879.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:

MayaTlab

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
924
Likes
1,512
Let's compare the HD 650's response to the Sundara's based off the graphs. First, its treble looks to be far more curtailed (5 dB and >10 dB nulls) in the mid to upper treble regions compared to Sundara's visibly mild treble accentuation and otherwise more neutral tracking.

That's an over-interpretation of their respective trebles response. On your own head some of these peaks and nulls may remain, or become absent, or be shifted, and their magnitude is likely to be quite different. Your own anatomy and positional variation issues can introduce increasingly significant deviations from test rigs above 1khz and all the more so above 5khz or so :
1449446210135.png
https://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=16877
If you see a pattern across a lot of different measurements and test rigs (such as Focal's 6khz peak) you may start to draw the conclusion that it may be an intrinsic feature of the headphones that you'll also experience on your head. Otherwise it's probably more prudent to think that it could just be the product of the interaction of the headphones with one's anatomy (or the test rig's).
The same prudence should be applied below 300hz or so because of sealing issues.
In the range where we can be the most confident, ie 300 to 1khz, even up to 5khz, both measure reasonably well that I'd just recommend a test drive on your own instead of relying on graphs to make a decision.
I.e. both are good enough to be worth trying :D.
 

LaL

Active Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2020
Messages
140
Likes
94
In simple terms even some EQ on the low end
really helps to tame the issues some have with the highs on the Sundara.
A little boost between 100 and 500Hz improves the timber and vocals get a bit fuller.
Dropping it back down between 50 and 120Hz prevents it getting woolly.
In my experience anything more than the tiniest adjustment above 1000Hz
and the Sundara's really start to lose their charm.
The boost on the sub-bass sounds so good.
 

Attachments

  • Sundara X.jpg
    Sundara X.jpg
    411 KB · Views: 409
Last edited:
H

Hifihedgehog

Guest
That's an over-interpretation of their respective trebles response. On your own head some of these peaks and nulls may remain, or become absent, or be shifted, and their magnitude is likely to be quite different. Your own anatomy and positional variation issues can introduce increasingly significant deviations from test rigs above 1khz and all the more so above 5khz or so :
View attachment 124349
https://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=16877
If you see a pattern across a lot of different measurements and test rigs (such as Focal's 6khz peak) you may start to draw the conclusion that it may be an intrinsic feature of the headphones that you'll also experience on your head. Otherwise it's probably more prudent to think that it could just be the product of the interaction of the headphones with one's anatomy (or the test rig's).
The same prudence should be applied below 300hz or so because of sealing issues.
In the range where we can be the most confident, ie 300 to 1khz, even up to 5khz, both measure reasonably well that I'd just recommend a test drive on your own instead of relying on graphs to make a decision.
I.e. both are good enough to be worth trying :D.
I agree that there can be some wide variance between test equipment including HATS and retrofitted microphone measurement systems and true perceived human listening. I would say though that you can generally apply a mask containing the additive and subtractive differences across the frequency band to get a good approximation of what you should expect to see across an assortment of listening situations and equipment. In how that applies here, I would say that Amir's test rig is a very good approximation of what I hear and perceive. His measurements of the HD 800, for example, better track the problems I hear in that particular headphones' muted upper midrange. So going off of the HD 800 there, I believe that his system tracks very neutrally for my approximate head and ear type. I would likewise say the same of what I heard in the HD 650, which had significant treble recessions that in my mind's eye seem to very closely match that which is reflected in Amir's plots. That gets me to thinking that, logically speaking, if Amir's test equipment matches what I hear so well, its target response very likely would be a dependable predictive measure of what I want in headphones. So yes, both are good and worth trying, but I would say the Sundara might actually be better even unequalized especially for those wanting more neutrality and clarity and perhaps a bit more midbass than the HD 650.
 

MayaTlab

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
924
Likes
1,512
His measurements of the HD 800, for example, better track the problems I hear in that particular headphones' muted upper midrange.

If by upper mids you mean 1Khz to 5khz or so, then that's a wholly different kettle of fish than above. There may be quite a bit of variation between listeners, but probably less so than above 5khz. Personally I see measurements past 1khz as a gradient from most confident at 1khz to increasingly less confident moving upwards. Past 5khz in general I've never really seen a measurement where even the location - let alone the magnitude - of the peaks and nulls matches well what I hear - with some exceptions (Some of Beyer's HPs' 8khz or so peak for example). And measurements will rarely agree between each others, even with the same standard.

I would likewise say the same of what I heard in the HD 650, which had significant treble recessions that in my mind's eye seem to very closely match that which is reflected in Amir's plots.

The general idea would be that with a lot of smoothing you could get a decent idea of the overall amount of trebles you'd get past 5000hz. But IMO I've only rarely found it useful as a sharp peak can basically ruin my trebles experience even if the surrounding frequencies are comparatively muted, but that's just me. And since with some exceptions some of these high Q peaks can be dependent on the interaction of the headphones and your own ears, it's difficult to predict.
 

mrmoizy

Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2019
Messages
53
Likes
103
Thank @amirm ! One thing that would be interesting is to see what additional power requirements your EQ settings bring into play. At home I have a stout headphone amp, but at work I use the Hidizs S8, which is good but is still a dongle. I think with no EQ the S8 might be able to power these decently, but would be curious to know how much more headroom would be needed with the EQ settings. Just a thought - but thanks again for another review
 

devopsprodude

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2021
Messages
332
Likes
324
Location
Beaverton, OR
Thank @amirm ! One thing that would be interesting is to see what additional power requirements your EQ settings bring into play. At home I have a stout headphone amp, but at work I use the Hidizs S8, which is good but is still a dongle. I think with no EQ the S8 might be able to power these decently, but would be curious to know how much more headroom would be needed with the EQ settings. Just a thought - but thanks again for another review
I'm running them off of Macbook Pro headphone jack without issues, with EQ on (Oratory new pad profile) and bass and treble amped up.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,376
Likes
234,540
Location
Seattle Area
Thank @amirm ! One thing that would be interesting is to see what additional power requirements your EQ settings bring into play. At home I have a stout headphone amp, but at work I use the Hidizs S8, which is good but is still a dongle. I think with no EQ the S8 might be able to power these decently, but would be curious to know how much more headroom would be needed with the EQ settings. Just a thought - but thanks again for another review
I used my RME ADI-2 DAC for listening tests (NOT the Topping A90). Most of the time the level was -10 dB or even lower. But at times, I cranked it up to 0 dB plus a bit. Hard to know what level of loudness you aspire but I say start with the S8 and if you need more power, switch to S9 with balanced output.
 

KiyPhi

Active Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2021
Messages
142
Likes
255
Thread state's "Hifiman Sundera Review".
So in other words you're saying the Sundara aren't great and named a few reasons that are either person dependant (sub bass, they have shaving sub bass or low sub bass, depends on the head), and one that isn't really true (the distortion at 104 is fine). Gotcha. Just making sure I was clear.
 

ZolaIII

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
4,071
Likes
2,410
So in other words you're saying the Sundara aren't great and named a few reasons that are either person dependant (sub bass, they have shaving sub bass or low sub bass, depends on the head), and one that isn't really true (the distortion at 104 is fine). Gotcha. Just making sure I was clear.
Ou it's there on every single measurements performed on all different hats so not really head dependant. I said not great, take a look at AEON RT for reference but not great and having a need to add lots of bust in sub and lower bass region translates to bad. That is if you prefer to have sub bass (which I do) or want to follow Harman curve (I don't). If you don't want either of that than distortion in low end is perfectly fine, still planars can do a lot better regarding both. Yes you ware very clear that you still have lot to learn.
 

taisho

Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 7, 2020
Messages
56
Likes
76
Location
Poland
They may measure and sound well but Hifiman is known for subpar durability of headphones. So many Amazon reviews mention poor build quality or something breaking after N months (any Hifiman model) that I'm not even going to consider this brand.

I wonder how my DT770 Pro 80 Ohm measure, maybe someone sends them to Amir? With Oratory1990 EQ settings they are really nice. At least in Europe, they seem to be the most popular closed-back headphones. This can make a good point of reference for other measurements.
 
Top Bottom